Royal Mail: Industrial Disputes

Phil Willis: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps his Department is taking to resolve the industrial dispute affecting Royal Mail.

Patrick McFadden: I have remained in close contact with the unions and Royal Mail management throughout this dispute. Our message to them has been clear —strikes are not the way to resolve differences or safeguard the future of our postal services and we urge them to resolve all issues through dialogue.

Royal Mail: Pensions

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what the size of the Royal Mail pension fund deficit is; what it has been in each year since 2000; and if he will make a statement.

Patrick McFadden: The current size of the accounting deficit as reported in the Royal Mail's 2008-09 report and accounts is £6.8 billion. The last formal actuarial valuation of the pension deficit was given as £3.4 billion in March 2006. The trustees are undertaking the next triennial actuarial valuation, which started in March 2009 and will need to finish by June 2010. The following table shows both accounting and actuarial pension deficit values since March 2003, which is when the scheme first fell into deficit.
	Funding of the pension scheme remains an operational matter between Royal Mail and the trustees.
	
		
			  Royal Mail pension deficit figures since financial year 2002-03 
			  £ billion 
			  Financial year  Accounting deficit  Actuarial deficit 
			 2002-03 4.7 2.5 
			 2003-04 4.4 — 
			 2004-05 4.0 — 
			 2005-06 5.6 3.4 
			 2006-07 5.0 — 
			 2007-08 2.9 — 
			 2008-09 6.8 — 
			  Note: Figures are rounded to the nearest £100 million

Cybercrime

Crispin Blunt: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what procedures the Government have in place to respond to a cyber attack against  (a) Government networks and  (b) the networks of private companies comprising UK critical national infrastructure; and if she will make a statement.

Tessa Jowell: Her Majesty's Government have a wide ranging set of measures in place to protect the United Kingdom from all forms of electronic attack including cyber-terrorism and cyber crime, and to respond appropriately.
	These measures include:
	The establishment in September of the Office of Cyber Security (OCS) and the Cyber Security Operations Centre (CSOC), to direct and coordinate the new national cyber security strategy.
	CPNI, Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, provides advice on electronic or cyber protective security measures to the businesses and organisations that comprise the UK's critical national infrastructure, including public utilities companies and banks. It also runs CSIRTUK, the Combined Security Incident Response Team (UK) which advises partners in industry who operate elements of the national infrastructure, how to manage the response to incidents.
	GovCertUK, part of GCHQ, works closely with CSIRTUK; it provides warnings, alerts and assistance in resolving serious IT incidents for the public sector.
	When GovCertUK becomes aware of an incident it provides the affected Department (usually through its IT Security Officer) with all the available information and offers relevant advice to help resolve the situation. On occasion, and as necessary, GovCertUK also provides on-site support to affected departments.
	CESG, also part of GCHQ, provides government departments with advice and guidance on how to protect against, detect and mitigate various types of cyber attack.
	In addition:
	All Government Departments have access to the Government Secure Intranet (GSi) which securely connects around 200 Government Departments and Agencies.
	The Government's Data Handling Review published in June 2008 mandated a number of minimum data security measures for HMG such as penetration testing of Government IT systems.

Cybercrime

Crispin Blunt: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what steps the Government are taking to achieve common standards of cyber security between EU member states; and if she will make a statement.

Tessa Jowell: The Government are working closely with the Commission, other European member states and ENISA (the European Network and Information Security Agency) to increase levels of security and resilience in the communications sector at many different levels. This includes collaborative efforts aimed at increasing European cooperation on policy to enhance cyber security, such as developing European priorities, principles and guidelines on long-term internet resilience and stability.
	The Government also takes an active part in major standards bodies (including ETSI—the European Telecommunications Standards Institute), organisations and discussions concerned with ICT standards, to ensure that processes are in place to create an effective standards regime in this area.

Centre for Excellence and Outcomes in Children and Young People's Services

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much has been spent on the Centre for Excellence and Outcomes in Children and Young People's Services in each year since its creation; and what the projected spending on the centre is in each of the next five years.

Dawn Primarolo: The Centre for Excellence and Outcomes in Children and Young People's Services was created in 2008-09 and spent £2.783 million. Projected spending is currently £5.573 million for 2009-10 and £5.466 million for 2010-11. The grant expires on 31 March 2011.

Children: Databases

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the projected cost is of the annual review of ContactPoint in 2009-10.

Dawn Primarolo: ContactPoint security arrangements are under a continuous review and its full security accreditation will be validated annually. The current projected cost of the annual security penetration test is £50,000, which will be met from within the overall £44 million annual operating budget for ContactPoint.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath of 9 September 2009,  Official Report, columns 1937-8W, on schools: finance, which individual programmes are included in the category Positive Activities for Young People Programmes; and how much funding has been allocated to each such programme.

Diana Johnson: holding answer 15 October 2009
	In the reply given on 9 September 2009,  Official Report, column 1936W, by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools, we offered a figure of £94 million for the expenditure in 2010-11.
	The Positive Activities for Young People Programme is now a single programme which is paid to local authorities as part of their Area Based Grant.

Pupil Exclusions: Disadvantaged

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the rate of permanent exclusion from school was in each income deprivation affecting children index decile of deprivation in the last year for which figures are available.

Dawn Primarolo: Information on the rate of permanent exclusion in each income deprivation affecting children index decile of deprivation, according to the location of the school, is shown in the table.
	
		
			  Primary, secondary and special schools( 1,2,3 ) rate of permanent exclusion by level of deprivation of school( 4) , England—2007-08 (estimates)( 5) 
			  Level of deprivation of school based on IDACI( 4)  (percentage)  Rate of permanent exclusion( 5,6) 
			 0-10 most deprived 0.12 
			 10-20 0.13 
			 20-30 0.14 
			 30-40 0.11 
			 40-50 0.12 
			 50-60 0.10 
			 60-70 0.09 
			 70-80 0.09 
			 80-90 0.08 
			 90-100 least deprived 0.09 
			 Total for all schools 0.11 
			 (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) Includes city technology colleges and academies (including all-through academies). (3) Includes maintained and non-maintained special schools. Excludes general hospital schools. (4) 2007 Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index at Super Output Area level based on the location of the school. (5) Figures relating to permanent exclusions are estimates based on incomplete pupil-level data. (6) The number of permanent exclusions in each IDACI band as a percentage of the number (headcount) of all pupils (excluding dually registered pupils) in January 2008.  Source: School Census

Schools: Standards

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 24 June 2009,  Official Report, column 996W, on schools: standards, what the estimated cost of collecting the information would be; which data protection rules would be contravened by collecting it; on what basis the estimate of £90 million was made; how much of the £90 million was paid by his Department; and from which budgetary headings the money came.

Dawn Primarolo: We do not hold the information on each individual adviser or their cost for 2008-09. We estimate that the cost of collecting this would exceed the cost threshold of £750 applicable to central Government. Furthermore, to provide information on individual advisers would infringe the rights of an individual's personal information and therefore be in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.
	The estimate of £90 million was derived from information collected through the Department's review of its field forces in 2008. It is difficult to provide a precise breakdown of expenditure on each of the field forces, since they are delivered through a range of mechanisms—some are directly contracted (so the cost of advisers is incorporated within a larger contract), some are located in Government Offices as secondees, and some are employed directly by DCSF or its NDPBs. The £90 million includes some funding from other Government Departments in the delivery of improvement support where there is shared policy interest. It is difficult to disaggregate the proportion paid by this Department.
	The Department's contribution forms a proportion of its allocation from the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR).

Schools: Vetting

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether  (a) hon. Members,  (b) Ministers and  (c) elected members of a local education authority will be required to register with the Independent Safeguarding Authority before visiting a school under the provisions of the Vetting and Barring Scheme; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 21 July 2009
	The hon. Member will have received a copy of the Secretary of State's letter of 31 July, which addresses all the points raised in this parliamentary question. I attach a copy for ease of reference.
	 Letter from Ed Balls, dated 31 July 2009 :
	 The new Vetting and Barring scheme as it applies to Members of Parliament and schools
	I am writing to all Members of Parliament (MPs) representing constituencies in England and Wales about the new Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS), with a courtesy copy to MPs representing constituencies in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
	Following recent questions in the House, which were prompted by some misleading media coverage, I want to make clear how the VBS will operate and, in particular, how it will apply to MPs when they work for schools, but not when they make visits to schools without working for those schools. (The same principles would also apply in relation to work for children's centres.)
	As you may be aware the VBS is being introduced in response to a recommendation from the independent Bichard Inquiry, established following the Soham murders by school caretaker Ian Huntley. Sir Michael Bichard's Inquiry into these tragic events found that there was more we could reasonably do so that people who have already shown they pose a threat to children are prevented from taking up positions in schools. The VBS is designed to achieve precisely this in relation to schools.
	All new entrants to the schools workforce will have to register under the VBS from November 2010. For those who were already doing such work before November 2010, starting with those who have never been subject to CRB checks, we will phase in registration between 2011 and 2015.
	In the schools context, people who are not members of the schools workforce will be required to register with the VBS for one of only two reasons. The first reason is because they frequently work for a particular school or schools. Conversely, someone who just visits schools, for example to watch a school play or attend a prize-giving, to meet the head teacher or to observe a lesson in a classroom, will not have to register under the VBS.
	MPs will therefore not have to register with the VBS in the course of their normal duties such as visits to schools or children's centres in their constituencies. The only circumstances in which they would have to register are if, for example, an MP has arranged to go into schools to, say, teach politics to groups of pupils once a month for several successive months, as this means they would be classed as working for schools. Anyone doing this as paid work would have to pay a one-off charge of £64 to register under the VBS, but if an MP is doing this as a volunteer the £64 fee would not apply.
	The second and only other situation, in the schools context, in which people who are not members of the school and children's workforce will have to register with the VBS is by virtue of the particular post and decision-making powers they hold. For this reason some local councillors and council officers will be required to register, including all Lead Members for Children and Directors of Children's Services. On this basis, I and my DCSF ministerial team plan to register with the Independent Safeguarding Authority as soon as registration starts in 2010.
	Further information about the VBS can be found at www.isa-gov.org.uk . In addition, I also enclose a note setting out the facts in response to some of the myths about the VBS which have appeared recently in the media.
	My Department, which leads for the Government in relation to policy on the safeguarding of children, is the main funder of the VBS together with the Department of Health, which has the parallel lead for vulnerable adults. The VBS in England and Wales is being delivered for DCSF and for the Department of Health by the Home Office, which also leads for the Government on criminal records information.
	I am copying this letter to Gwenda Thomas AM, Deputy Minister for Social Services in the Welsh Assembly Government.

Building Alterations

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what changes to permitted development rights which have restricted the rights of property owners to extend a dwelling have been made in the last 36 months.

Ian Austin: The Government introduced a new regime of permitted development rights for householders in October 2008. This replaced the previous volume based limits approach with one which sets clearer limits on the size and position of household developments that can benefit from permitted development rights.
	The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No. 2) (England) Order 2008 allows householders to extend their properties without the need for planning permission subject to the limitations and conditions that are set out in the order.

Community Development Foundation

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what funding his Department is providing to the Community Development Foundation in 2009-10; and what the  (a) function and  (b) purpose of the foundation is.

Barbara Follett: Communities and Local Government are providing £1,706,000 in grant in aid to our NDPB the Community Development Foundation in 2009-10. CDF's charitable objects are: to develop the capacity and skills of members of socially and economically or socially disadvantaged communities in such a way that they are better able to identify, and help meet, their needs and to participate more fully in society.
	The aims of the Community Development Foundation are to maintain contact with grassroots experience, through consultancy and managed programmes and projects, links with individual practitioners, and indirectly through collaborative work with partner organisations; identify transferable good practice, through research, evaluation and collaborative activity; advise policy-makers and disseminate good practice, through policy work, training and conferences, publications and consultancy.

Council Housing: Construction

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many council homes he expects to be built in each year under the local authority new build programme.

Ian Austin: The housing pledge, a centrepiece of our building Britain's future plan, announced an extra £1.5 billion to build new houses over this year and next. Funds from this Pledge have been earmarked to support direct development by local authorities, to add to the £100 million already announced in the Budget.
	Round 1 of the local authority new build programme announced in September resulted in 49 councils being awarded funding to build 217 schemes across the country providing 2,174 new homes. Bidding in Round 2 closes at the end of October.
	We expect the programme to provide around 3,500 new homes, completed in 2010-11 and 2011-12.

Council Housing: Finance

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what his most recent estimate is of the revenue raised by local authorities from reducing their council tax discount on empty homes; and whether this revenue will  (a) continue to be kept by local authorities after the 2011-12 settlement and  (b) be taken into account in the calculation of their tax-base for the purposes of allocating central government grant.

Barbara Follett: As at October 2008, reductions to council tax discounts for empty homes generated an annual additional revenue of £104 million over England. "Additional revenue" refers to the extra amount raised by applying a discount smaller than 50 per cent. We expect to calculate the council tax projections for the 2011-12 settlement based on the Council Tax Base (CTB) returns that authorities supply in 2008, 2009 and 2010. These will take into account the reduction in council tax discount on empty homes.

Council Tax: Valuation

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 30 June 2009,  Official Report, column 190W, on council tax, 
	(1)  how many dwellings in England have been assigned the value significant code of OS (patio) in each local authority area, or in each equivalent local administrative area that the Valuation Office Agency's database uses, in the most recent period for which figures are available;
	(2)  how many homes in each local authority area have a  (a) GG value significant code and  (b) OS code;
	(3)  with reference to the Valuation Office Agency's reply to request 11437929.1/CEO/TE made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, if he will place in the Library a copy of the chart showing the number of dwellings assigned with each individual dwellinghouse code and each individual value significant code across England in the most recent period for which figures are available;
	(4)  how many dwellings in each local billing authority, or closest administrative unit used by the Valuation Office Agency, have been recorded with a  (a) VC and  (b) VE value significant code.

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 29 June 2009,  Official Report, column 25W, on council tax: valuation, for what reasons the automated valuation model (AVM) is not being used for council tax valuations and revaluations; what use is being made of the AVM database; and whether the database is being updated with property attribute information.

Barbara Follett: The automated valuation model (AVM) is not being used for a council tax revaluation as there is no revaluation taking place. It is not being used for individual council tax valuations, as it was developed as a tool for mass appraisal and is not an efficient tool for valuing individual properties.
	There is no AVM database. The AVM accesses the Valuation Office Agency's digitised database of property records.
	The Valuation Office Agency's digitised database of property records, is continually updated with property attribute information as part of ongoing work in connection with maintaining current council tax valuation lists.

Council Tax: Valuation

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many properties within the Wiltshire County Council area are recorded with each individual (a) dwelling house code and (b) value significant code, including each individual (i) type, (ii) number of rooms, (iii) number of bedrooms, (iv) number of bathrooms, (v) number of floors, (vi) floor level, (vii) parking, (viii) garaging, (ix) conservatory type, (x) age, (xi) outbuilding and (xii) modernisation code according to electronic records held by the Valuation Office Agency.

Barbara Follett: The number of properties with each individual dwellinghouse code and each value significant code, for all local authority areas I England, will be placed in the Library of the House.

Departmental Cost Effectiveness

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what targets his Department has been set for achieving value for money in its operations; and what progress has been made in meeting those targets.

Barbara Follett: The Department's value for money targets and its plans to achieve these are set out in the 2009 Department annual report (chapter 9, page 150). In summary, the comprehensive spending review 2007 (CSR07) set the Department a target to achieve £887 million vfm gains by March 2011, comprising of:
	£734 million through the supply of new affordable housing;
	£110 million from the Fire and Rescue Service;
	£43 million by reducing the cost of running the Department.
	Progress against these targets will be published in the Department's 2009 autumn performance report.

Departmental Databases

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what  (a) information and  (b) datasets held on the Places Database (i) are not accessible to the public via the Places internet interface and (ii) are only accessible from within his Department;
	(2)  which datasets are contained on his Department's Places Database.

Ian Austin: All the data and information that is held within the Places Database are accessible to the public.
	The information requested on each the datasets contained on the Places Database has been deposited in the Library of the House.

Departmental Manpower

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 9 September 2009,  Official Report, column 2007W, on departmental manpower, what the  (a) job titles and  (b) divisions are of each of the 59.5 full-time equivalent staff on fixed term contracts.

Barbara Follett: The following table sets out the division and grade of the full-time equivalent staff on fixed term contracts, according to our personnel records as requested.
	
		
			   Grade 
			  Location  AO and equivalent  EO and equivalent  HEO and equivalent  SEO and equivalent  G7and equivalent  G6 and equivalent  SCS 
			 Communities Group 1 2 2 2 2 — 3 
			 Corporate Delivery Group — 2 4 — — — — 
			 Housing and Planning 1 9 7 8 3 2 1 
			 HR & Business Change Group — — — — — — 1 
			 Local Government and Regeneration Group — 2 — — — — 1 
			 Regions and Communities — — — — — — 1 
			 Strategy and Performance — — — — — — 3 
			 The Planning Inspectorate — — — — — — 1 
			 On loan to other Government Departments — — — — — — 2

Departmental Procurement

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 12 May 2009,  Official Report, column 714W, on departmental procurement, what the cost was of procuring aerial photographs from Infoterra for the digital mapping project; and which public sector bodies are parties to the Pan-Government Agreement.

Ian Austin: The Pan-Government Agreement currently provides 106 central Government bodies (listed as follows) with geographic data. The data is used for a variety of purposes including environmental analysis and land registration. The aerial photography component is worth a maximum of £9.54 million +VAT in the first four years.
	4NW
	Advantage West Midlands
	Amgueddfa Cymru—National Museum Wales
	Arts Council of Wales
	Association of North East Councils
	Audit Commission
	Boundary Commission for England (BCE)
	Boundary Commission for Wales
	British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)
	British Council
	British Geological Survey (BGS)
	British Waterways
	Cabinet Office
	Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH)
	Charity Commission
	Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
	Church Commissioners
	Coal Authority (The)
	Commission for Rural Communities
	Communities and Local Government
	Consumer Council for Water
	Consumer Focus
	Countryside Council for Wales (CCW)
	Crown Estate (The)
	Deer Commission for Scotland (DCS)
	Defence Estates (DE)
	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)
	Department for Children, Schools and Families
	Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)
	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
	Department for Transport (DfT)
	Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
	Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC)
	Department of Health (DH)
	East Midlands Development Agency (EMDA)
	East Midlands Regional Assembly
	East of England Development Agency
	East of England Regional Assembly
	Electoral Commission (The)
	English Heritage
	Environment Agency (EA)
	Food Standards Agency (The)
	Forensic Science Service
	Forestry Commission
	Government Offices for the English Regions (GON)
	Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
	Health Protection Agency
	Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC)
	High Speed Two
	Higher Education Funding Council for Wales
	Highways Agency
	Historic Scotland
	Home Office
	Homes and Communities Agency
	House of Commons Library
	Information Centre for Health and Social Care
	Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC)
	Land Registry
	Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales
	London Thames Gateway Development Corporation
	Maritime and Coastguard Agency
	Met Office
	Ministry of Defence
	Ministry of Justice
	National Assembly for Wales Parliamentary Service
	National Audit Office
	National Housing and Planning Advice Unit
	National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA)
	Natural England
	NHS Connecting for Health
	NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service
	North West Regional Development Agency
	Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA)
	Office for National Statistics (ONS)
	Office of Communications (OFCOM)
	Office of Government Commerce (OGC)
	Oil and Pipelines Agency
	Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA)
	One North East
	Potato Council Ltd
	Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland(RCAHMS)
	Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales (RCAHMW)
	Royal Parks (The)
	Scottish Water
	Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA)
	South East England Development Agency (SEEDA)
	South East England Regional Assembly
	South West Councils
	South West Observatory
	South West Regional Development Agency (SWRDA)
	Sport England
	Sports Council for Wales
	Tenant Services Authority
	The National Library of Wales
	Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corporation
	Training and Development Agency for Schools
	Transport Scotland
	Tribunals Service
	UK Border Agency
	Valuation Office Agency (VOA)
	Wales Centre for Health (WCfH)
	Welsh Assembly Government
	Welsh Health Estates
	West Midlands Regional Assembly
	Yorkshire and Humber Assembly
	Yorkshire Forward

Departmental Public Expenditure

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 9 September 2009,  Official Report, column 2007W, on departmental finance, what the breakdown by budgetary subheading is of his Department's other current spending for 2008-09.

Barbara Follett: The Department's other current expenditure in 2008-09 was £15.8 millions (page 50, line G Resources Accounts 2008-09). The breakdown of this is as follows:
	
		
			   £ million 
			 Pay (1)3.4 
			 Non-pay (2)11.0 
			 Non-cash (3)1.4 
			 Total 15.8 
			 (1) Expenditure on outward secondees fully offset by income received (including in appropriation in aid column of accounts) (2) Includes a range of compensation payments over the course of the year, most notably a £9.3 million payment following parliamentary commissioner for administration ruling on a planning case. (3) Balance of provision for compensation payments to ex-PSA staff which are non discretionary.

Fire Services: Pensions

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the monetary cost of employers' contributions to fire service pensions was  (a) in cash terms and  (b) as a proportion of the total expenditure of fire and rescue authorities in (i) the most recent year for which figures are available and (ii) in 1997-98.

Barbara Follett: The Firefighters' Pension Schemes 1992 and 2006 are unfunded, pay as you go schemes and under the financing arrangements in operation in 1997-98 pensions were paid from revenue: there were no employers' contributions.
	New financing arrangements came into operation in April 2006 for English fire and rescue authorities, since when employers have paid a contribution of 21.3 per cent. of pensionable pay for members of the Firefighters' Pension Scheme 1992 and 11 per cent. for members of the New Firefighters' Pension Scheme 2006; in addition a charge is paid to cover the cost of any ill-health retirement.
	In 2008-09, employers' contributions from English authorities totalled £203.477 million, which was 9.6 per cent. of total expenditure.

FlexSpace

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what assessment he has made of the outcome against objectives of the operation of the FlexSpace initiative in his Department's accommodation.

Barbara Follett: The planned reduction in Communities and Local Government's London estate from two buildings to one was achieved on 5 October 2009 with the final relocation of staff from Ashdown House to Eland House, thus enabling savings of £4.5 million per annum on reduced operating costs.
	The success of the migration to flexible desking will be formally assessed in early 2010. A staff survey was carried out in January 2009 to establish a baseline for how staff in Communities and Local Government assessed their working environment. The same survey will be run in March 2010, some three months after the last moves to flexible desking, to measure the level of improvement. The survey will be supplemented by workshops, focus groups and individual interviews.

Government Office for London

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what functions and responsibilities in relation to housing are undertaken by the Government Office for London.

Ian Austin: Housing is the policy responsibility of Communities and Local Government, and GOL works to deliver a number of the Department's housing targets in London. GOL uses its local knowledge both to work with a range of partners, including the Mayor of London, The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) and the London boroughs, to promote and improve understanding of the Government's housing policy and to influence the development of new housing initiatives.
	GOL's housing role includes, advising CLG Ministers on the Mayor's housing strategy and his recommendations on the allocation of funding from the regional housing pot in London, negotiating housing targets in London boroughs' local area agreements, and advising Ministers on housing growth issues in north London and Croydon.
	In addition, GOL's planning work contributes to the housing agenda through its planning responsibilities. These include advising on and scrutinising the London Plan and Local Development Frameworks on behalf of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to ensure that provision is made for both affordable and market housing. GOL also has a national role in confirming planning, housing and regeneration compulsory purchase orders in England on behalf of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, which facilitates regeneration and housing schemes nationwide.

Greater London Authority: Finance

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what estimates were made by his predecessor Department of the  (a) cost and  (b) staffing complement of the Greater London Authority prior to its creation.

Barbara Follett: The White Paper, A Mayor and Assembly for London, which set out the Government's proposals for the creation of the Greater London Authority (GLA) in March 1998 provided an indicative estimate that the GLA would have around 250 staff and an annual cost of around £20 million a year.
	This initial estimate was subsequently refined as the GLA's specific duties and responsibilities became clearer following the passage of the GLA Act 1999. The then Minister for Local Government announced in February 2000 that the GLA's first full year budget for 2000-01 would be £32.5million, to be funded by grant and precept. This first budget assumed an indicative staff complement of 400 FTE staff for the GLA.

Housing: Finance

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much he expects the Homes and Communities Agency to pay to housing developers for completion of homes under the National Affordable Housing programme in each of the next three years.

John Healey: As set out in the Homes and Communities Agency's Corporate Plan we are expecting to invest, £3,248 million and £2,480 million in 2009-10 and 2010-11 respectively through the Affordable Housing programme on either starts on site or completions. Budgets for 2011-12 will be subject to the outcome of the next spending review. Housing developers are eligible to submit bids for this grant funding.

Housing: Finance

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government with reference to his Department's press release of 17 July 2009, on housing, how much funding will be transferred from  (a) the Growth Fund,  (b) the Decent Homes Arms Length Management Organisation Programme,  (c) the Private Sector Renewal programme and  (d) each of the Homes and Communities Agency programmes to contribute to the £1.5 billion of funding announced in the Building Britain's Future.

John Healey: To enable investment to build an extra 20,000 new affordable homes for rent and low cost sale, I have reduced £128 million from the Growth Fund and £75 million from the Private Sector Renewal Fund through 2009-11 and rescheduled £150 million from the Decent Homes ALMO programme. In addition, I have charged the Homes and Communities Agency with producing £183 million of the overall £1.5 billion package through more efficient and flexible management of its range of housing and regeneration programmes.

Housing: Low Incomes

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the average purchase price for a home sold via  (a) Rent to HomeBuy,  (b) HomeBuy Direct,  (c) New Build HomeBuy,  (d) MyChoice HomeBuy,  (e) OwnHome,  (f) the First Time Buyers Initiative and  (g) Social HomeBuy was in each region in each of the last three years.

John Healey: The following tables show average regional market value of HomeBuy properties completed in the last three years.
	
		
			  2006-07 
			  £ 
			   Social HomeBuy  New Build HomeBuy  First Time Buyers Initiative 
			 East Midlands 83,333 129,202 n/a 
			 Eastern n/a 174,470 n/a 
			 London 221,125 229,374 197,297 
			 North East 62,000 125,830 n/a 
			 North West 90,500 129,706 n/a 
			 South East 165,000 165,380 222,566 
			 South West n/a 150,841 n/a 
			 West Midlands n/a 140,823 172,143 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 78,333 104,995 n/a 
		
	
	
		
			  2007-08 
			  £ 
			   Social HomeBuy  New Build HomeBuy  First Time Buyers Initiative 
			 East Midlands n/a 132,801 174,370 
			 Eastern 143,500 173,207 n/a 
			 London 151,672 219,574 236,573 
			 North East 135,000 115,333 159,958 
			 North West 183,449 132,781 127,732 
			 South East 164,488 175,040 230,826 
			 South West n/a 152,171 200,642 
			 West Midlands 153,375 135,135 138,104 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber n/a 116,030 161,520 
		
	
	
		
			  2008-09 
			  £ 
			   Social HomeBuy  New Build HomeBuy  First Time Buyers Initiative  My Choice  Own Home 
			 East Midlands n/a 141,341 130,747 123,134 139,651 
			 Eastern 192,500 158,578 210,129 162,854 173,112 
			 London 205,020 226,977 211,702 259,098 217,958 
			 North East 77,571 113,813 130,141 118,956 130,970 
			 North West 80,207 128,114 130,498 130,079 139,687 
			 South East 180,150 181,285 195,949 171,414 181,717 
			 South West n/a 161,091 175,575 151,598 168,713 
			 West Midlands 113,542 114,302 131,166 128,685 141,015 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 130,000 121,344 138,049 122,830 142,275 
		
	
	There were no Rent to HomeBuy sales recorded in 2008-09. New Build HomeBuy and Social HomeBuy purchasers are able to purchase a share of the property value from 25 per cent. upwards.

Housing: Public Expenditure

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the central Government expenditure on housing was in  (a) cash terms and  (b) real terms in each year since 1996-97.

Barbara Follett: Data on public expenditure by function is published annually in "Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses". The latest edition was published in June 2009 (Cm 7630) and includes data from financial year 1987-88 up to and including 2008-09.

Housing: Standards

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what obligations local authorities have to  (a) undertake a private sector housing condition survey and  (b) provide resulting information to his Department;
	(2)  what the timetable is for the completion of the latest round of private sector housing condition surveys.

Ian Austin: All local authorities are expected to have in place a local housing strategy. This provides an analysis of the housing needs of an area, covering housing across all tenures and provides a framework for ensuring that all parties act in a co-ordinated way to tackle housing problems. It is in local authority's interests to collect information across all housing tenures through housing condition surveys, including those privately owned, to ensure it has a plan in place for its current and future housing needs for all local residents. The Government do not stipulate either the precise detail of local housing condition surveys, the timetable of these or that local authorities share the information collected with Communities and Local Government, it is for local authorities to decide the best way to take this forward.

Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuation Wales Conference

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will place in the Library a copy of the speech, presentation and handouts made by the representative of the Valuation Tribunal Service at the Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuation Wales conference held in Bournemouth on 30 September 2009.

Barbara Follett: I have placed in the Library a copy of the presentation given by Anne Galbraith OBE, Chairman of the Valuation Tribunal Service, entitled the Modern Appeals Service given at the Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuation's Annual conference in Bournemouth on 30 November 2009.

Land: Databases

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough of 11 March 2009,  Official Report, columns 487-8W, on land: databases, what aerial and satellite photography members of the Pan-Government Agreement will have access to; and what associated photography products are provided by  (a) Ordnance Survey,  (b) Landmark and  (c) Dotted Eyes.

Ian Austin: Members of the Pan-Government Agreement have access to a range of data from three suppliers (Landmark-Dotted Eyes, Next Perspectives and Ordnance Survey). The Next Perspectives consortium provides aerial photography (25 cm resolution colour imagery; colour infra-red data); and height data (contour and digital terrain models). Satellite data is not included.
	There are no other suppliers of aerial photography products under the PGA. Ordnance Survey provides a range of products including large, medium and small scale data; transport; boundaries; address and gazetteer data. The Landmark-Dotted Eyes consortium supplies the PGA with postcodes and points of interest data.

Local Government: Accountability

Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  which local authorities have passed  (a) delivery of and  (b) ownership of services in respect of their duty to involve to social enterprises; and whether any such transfer has also involved a transfer of premises;
	(2)  what steps he is taking to assess the effectiveness of  (a) local authorities and  (b) other public agencies in discharging their obligations in respect of their (i) duty to promote democracy and (ii) duty to involve;
	(3)  what information his Department holds on those local authorities which have not yet put in place mechanisms in respect of their duty to  (a) involve and  (b) promote democracy obligations; and if he will make a statement;
	(4)  what information his Department holds on whether local authorities and other public agencies are engaging representatives of vulnerable persons as required under the provisions of the 7.

Barbara Follett: The duty to promote democracy is included in the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill currently in Parliament. It is not yet, therefore, a statutory duty.
	In terms of the duty to involve, it is principally for local authorities and relevant public bodies to which this currently applies, to assess for themselves the effectiveness of when and how they involve others, and how this improves services and community cohesion in an area. My Department does not collate and hold detailed information on how individual authorities are implementing the duty to involve, including any transfers of services to social enterprises. Under the new Comprehensive Area Assessment, the independent inspectorate of local services will be considering how well local authorities and partners understand and respond to the needs and aspirations of local people. The first set of CAA reports are due to be published on 10 December.
	Inspectorates have made clear that they will pay particular attention in their assessments to people whose personal circumstances present a risk to themselves or to others. They will report clearly where their needs are not being met or where they have concerns about them being met in future, allowing for the different levels of risk and urgency associated with such circumstances.

Local Government: Barnet

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding his Department has provided to the London borough of Barnet to test behavioural economics to date.

Barbara Follett: The Department gave £350,000 to the London borough of Barnet in 2008-09 for pilot projects on behavioural change on recycling.

Met Office

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether his Department provides funding to the Met Office.

Barbara Follett: Communities and Local Government provides funding to the Met Office for the provision of the web-based Firemet service. FireMet is a weather system designed to provide the Fire and Rescue Service with the latest weather information to help them identify a safe approach when dealing with a major incident.
	Funding provided to date is as follows and covers costs associated with the development of the Firemet system, associated training and operational delivery of the service.
	2006-07: £21,385
	2007-08: £86,010
	2008-09: £53,716

Mortgages: Government Assistance

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding has been  (a) distributed to each local authority through the Preventing Repossession Revenue Grant and  (b) subsequently spent by each authority; how many people applied for grants; how many grants were issued in the ranges (i) £0 - £249, (ii) £250 - £499, (iii) £500 - £999, (iv) £1,000 - £1,999, (v) £2,000 - £2,999, (vi) £3,000 - £3,999, (vii) £4,000 - £4,999 and (viii) £5,000 or more; what assessment he has made of the effect of the scheme in preventing repossession or eviction in each year since the grant's inception; and what assessment he has made of the likely effects of the scheme in the next two years.

John Healey: The £20 million Preventing Repossessions Fund was announced by the Chancellor in the Budget to enable local authorities to offer small loans up to a maximum value of £5,000 to families at risk of homelessness through repossession or eviction. A list of allocations made in June 2009 to individual local authorities for 2009-10 has been placed in the House Library. Information about the use councils have made of this grant and number of households who have received a payment from the fund will be published later this year.
	The fund forms part of the range of assistance that has been put in place at every stage to help struggling households. It provides additional support to local authorities in their work to prevent repossessions and eviction in difficult cases where households may have multiple debts or negative equity.

Mortgages: Government Assistance

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the annual budget for the Mortgage Help campaign is; and how much is expected to be spent on  (a) campaign advertising and  (b) the campaign's website in 2009-10.

John Healey: In the financial year 2009-10 the total allocated budget for the Mortgage Help campaign is £1.855 million. The campaign is still running, and so spend allocations for different aspects of the campaign have not yet been finalised. The Department will publish a breakdown of the actual campaign spend at the time of its next annual report.

Non-Domestic Rates

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what statistics  (a) his Department and  (b) the Valuation Office Agency are compiling on the level of take-up of deferred business rates under his Department's scheme to allow partial deferral of 2009-10 increases.

Barbara Follett: On  (a), the Department is planning to collect figures on the total number of deferrals granted and the total amount deferred for each local billing authority.
	On  (b), the Valuation Office Agency does not collect this date.

Non-Domestic Rates: Empty Property

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much net revenue has been raised from the new regime of empty property business rates in each year since their introduction.

Barbara Follett: Local authorities reported that they granted £487 million of empty property relief in 2008-09 and estimate that in 2009-10 they will grant empty property relief of £570 million.
	These data are available in the National non-domestic rates statistics releases that are available on the Communities and Local Government website at:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/localregional/localgovernmentfinance/statistics/nondomesticrates/

Non-Domestic Rates: Empty Property

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which local authorities have responded to his Department's information-gathering exercise on empty property business rates.

Barbara Follett: All 354 billing authorities in existence as of 31 March 2009 provided data on  (a) the numbers of empty properties as of 31 March 2009 and  (b) of those, the number of empty properties with a rateable value of less than £15,000. The data were provided on the billing authority's annual NNDR3 return.

Planning Permission: Fees and Charges

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what discretion local authorities have in determining the fees payable by applicants seeking to extend existing planning consents for up to three years from 1 October 2009;
	(2)  what statutory level of fees is payable by applicants seeking to extend existing planning consents by up to three years from 1 October 2009;
	(3)  what recent assessment he has made of the merits of setting at £500 the fee charged by local authorities applying for an extension to existing planning permissions for up to three years from 1 October 2009.

Ian Austin: Fees are currently set through The Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 1989 as amended by The Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2008. Local authorities are not able to apply discretion to the regulations. Until the fees regulations are further amended later this year, the level of fee payable for an application to extend the time limits for implementation of an existing planning permission is as it would be for a new application for the same development. When the fees regulations are amended, a reduced fee level will be payable. Proposed fee levels, which are currently under consideration, are for £500 for a major development, £50 for a householder application and £170 for any other application. The fee levels will be subject to parliamentary debates in both Houses before coming into force.

Quirk Review

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which recommendations of the Quirk Review have  (a) been and  (b) not been implemented.

Barbara Follett: "Making Assets Work", the Quirk Review of Community Management and Ownership of Public Assets, was published in May 2007. The Government accepted its recommendations and published their response to the Quirk Review "Opening the Transfer Window". Action has been taken to implement all the recommendations and has included a widespread promotional campaign; publishing guidance on managing risks in asset transfer; updating local authority asset management guidance; the Advancing Assets demonstration programme to support local authority and community partners in asset transfer. The Advancing Assets programme is continuing and a dedicated Asset Transfer Unit has been established to provide independent guidance, advice and support on asset transfer.

Recycling

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what guidance his Department issues to local authorities on the treatment of  (a) local authority collection of garden waste and  (b) home composting of garden waste for the purposes of assessing progress towards local authority recycling targets.

Dan Norris: I have been asked to reply.
	Local authorities in England no longer have centrally imposed statutory targets on recycling and composting—this is consistent with Government policy to give local areas more freedom and flexibility on how they deliver national objectives.
	The Government believe local authorities are better placed to make decisions on the best waste management strategy for their local area, so it does not direct or interfere in the decisions they make.
	DEFRA has not provided any specific guidance but provides a range of targeted support to help local authorities deliver their targets through bodies such as the Waste Implementation Programme and the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP).
	WRAP has also been working on a model to calculate how much waste is diverted from landfill via home composting. The model, once complete, could help councils include home composting in targets to divert biodegradable municipal waste from landfill under the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme.

Regional Planning and Development: Green Belt

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in which locations the draft regional spatial strategies submitted to his Department recommend a review of green belt protection.

Ian Austin: A Regional Spatial Strategy whether in draft or in its final form issued by the Secretary State would not affect the level of protection afforded to Green Belt, this is set out in National Planning Policy. Policies in Regional Spatial Strategies may recommend that, in a particular area, there should be a review of land designated as green belt.

Solution Establishment Workshop

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the  (a) purpose and  (b) nature of the Solution Establishment Workshop (SEW) set up under FireControl is; when SEW commenced work; what functions SEW has been assigned; when SEW is expected to complete its work; and whether he expects outcomes from the SEW exercise to be published.

Shahid Malik: holding  answer  12 October 2009
	The purpose of the FireControl Solution Establishment Workshops (SEWs) is to bring together key partners in the Fire and Rescue Service, the Department and EADS to design and develop the IT system. The SEWs will ensure that the system meets mandatory requirements, the operational needs of the users and builds on the work completed so far in order to deliver an effective, resilient network. The SEWs build on an extensive series of technical workshops which have taken place since the project was awarded in 2007.
	SEWs began work on 22 June 2009 and are scheduled to complete their work in November 2009. The outcomes from the SEW exercise will be communicated to key stakeholders.

Surrey Police: Council Tax

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what outturn total Band D council tax bill was levied in each billing authority in Surrey in 2009-10 following the capping of Surrey Police Authority.

Barbara Follett: Details of the average band D council tax payable in 2009-10 in each billing authority in Surrey following the designation of the Surrey police authority are shown in the table.
	
		
			   £ 
			 Elmbridge 1,483 
			 Epsom and Ewell 1,442 
			 Guildford 1,447 
			 Mole Valley 1,438 
			 Reigate and Banstead 1,482 
			 Runnymede 1,416 
			 Spelthorne 1,450 
			 Surrey Heath 1,482 
			 Tandridge 1,484 
			 Waverley 1,482 
			 Woking 1,483 
		
	
	The information is also available in table 6 of the statistical release "Council Tax levels set by local authorities in England 2009-10 (Revised)" that was published on the Communities and Local Government website on 30 July and is available at the following link:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/localregional/localgovernmentfinance/statistis/counciltax/rates/

Wind Power: Valuation

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will place in the Library a copy of the Valuation Office Agency's guidance and methodology for valuing wind turbines; and what criteria apply to the inclusion of power generation in the  (a) national and  (b) local rating list.

Barbara Follett: The guidance and methodology for valuing wind turbines for rating purposes is set out in the VOA Rating Manual, which can be found on the VOA website:
	http://www.voa.gov.uk/instructions/chapters/rating_manual/vol5/sect530/frame.htm
	Since April 2000 power generators have appeared in local rating lists. The identity of the occupier, the purpose of occupation and the extent of property occupied is generally straightforward and normally within a small geographical area and a single billing authority.
	The central rating list contains network properties such as the Transco gas networks and the clean water supply companies, these hereditaments cover large areas and numerous administrative boundaries.

University Officer Training Corps

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for the operation of the University Officer Training Corps in the next six months.

Kevan Jones: The Army has taken a number of savings measures in order to stay within agreed funding allocation for this financial year. As part of these savings, all University Officer Training Corps (UOTC) cadet and volunteer instructor pay will cease until April 2010. This will generate savings of £3 million.
	It is hoped that the majority of core training activity, specifically the Military Leadership and Development Programme, will continue on a voluntary basis. Undergraduates and volunteer instructors will continue to be reimbursed for travel and subsistence costs.
	Non-core training activities may also continue on a voluntary basis at the discretion of Commanding Officers subject to the availability of volunteer instructors.

Wind Power

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence with reference to the answer of 11 March 2008,  Official Report, column 296W, on wind power, to which wind farm proposals his Department has objected since January 2008; and for what reasons in each case.

Kevan Jones: Since January 2008 the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has objected to 52 wind farm planning applications, the details of which are recorded in the following table.
	
		
			   Site name  Planning authority  Reason for MOD objection 
			  2008 Waun Garno Powys County Council Unacceptable restriction on operational low flying 
			  East Skichen Angus Council Interference with air traffic control (ATC) radar 
			  Dusty Drum Angus Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  North Hall East Riding Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Redland Caradon County Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Hook Moor Leeds City Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Chittering South Cambridgeshire District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Gwyndy Quarry Gaia 1 Isle of Anglesey Interference with ATC radar 
			  French Farm Peterborough City Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Rothes Extension Scottish Government Interference with ATC radar 
			  Little White Alice Kerrier District Council Interference with Fleet radar 
			  Kingsthorpe stables West Lindsey District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Withernwick East Riding Council Interference with air defence (AD) radar 
			  The Firs Aberdeenshire Council Interference with AD radar 
			  Brunel University Hillingdon London Borough Interference with ATC radar 
			  Maer Hills Newcastle under Lyme Borough Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Woodside Farm Moray Council Interference with ATC radar and statutory safeguarding concerns 
			  Everest Community College Hampshire County Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Briar Lodge North Shropshire District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			 
			  2009 Todd Hill Castle Morpeth Borough Council Interference with threat radars 
			  Close Farm Hambleton District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Trevena Cross Nurseries Kerrier District Council Interference with Fleet radar 
			  Race Bank Department of Energy and Climate Change Interference with AD radar 
			  Neslam Farm South Kesteven Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Greenacre Kerrier District Council Interference with Fleet radar 
			  Docking Shoal Department of Energy and Climate Change Interference with ATC radar 
			  Linton Uttlesford District Council, South Cambs District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Cloffrickford Aberdeenshire Council Interference with Met Office radar 
			  Heysham Lancaster City Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Sycamore Farm North Kesteven District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Howe Hills Wind Farm Durham County Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Burnthouse Fenland District Interference with ATC radar 
			  Dun Law II East Lothian Council Interference with threat radar 
			  Woodlane Selby District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Carnebone Cornwall Council Interference with Fleet radar 
			  Dusty Drum Angus Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Solwaybank Dumfries and Galloway Council Unacceptable restriction on low flying, interference with ATC radar 
			  Bishopwood Selby District Council Interference with ATC radar and statutory safeguarding concerns 
			  Branston Community College Lincolnshire County Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Baumber East Lindsay District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Llwchyrhal Uchaf Ceredigion Interference with ATC radar 
			  St. Ivo Outdoor Centre Huntingdon District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Rosewain Farm Allerdale Borough Council Interference with NATS radar (military) and threat radar 
			  H&H Celcon East Riding of Yorkshire Interference with ATC radar 
			  Auckland House Wiltshire Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Saughmont Angus Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  CleekHall Selby District Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Saywell Boston Borough Council Interference with ATC radar 
			  Carlesgill extension Dumfries and Galloway Council Interference with threat radar and Eskdalemuir Seismological Recording Station 
			  Infinis Westfield Fife Council Interference with Met Office radar 
			  Bower Hinton South Somerset District Council Interference with Fleet radar 
			  Monynut Scottish Government Interference with AD radar 
		
	
	MOD only objects to planning applications for wind farms where it is essential to do so. All wind farm applications that we assess are subject to individual consideration. We consider a range of factors such as safety or the impact on Air Defence or Air Traffic radars and objections will only be lodged against planning applications if the operational impact is assessed as being unmanageable. Even where concerns are raised, mitigation options will be suggested to the developer where possible.

Coal: Industrial Health and Safety

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many  (a) live optional risk offer scheme and  (b) dead optional risk offer scheme coal health compensation scheme applications have been made by the 50 solicitors' firms which have made the highest number of each type of claim.

David Kidney: Number of awards made under the Live Optional Risk Offer Scheme (LOROS) and Dead Optional Risk Offer Scheme (DOROS) for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) claims submitted by the 50 highest claimants' representatives under the coal health compensation scheme is shown in the following tables as at 4 October 2009.
	
		
			  Coal compensation claims where applications have been made under the LOROS scheme 
			  Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 
			  Claimants'  representatives  Location  Total LOROS  claims 
			 Beresfords Solicitors Doncaster 11,104 
			 Browell Smith and Co Newcastle Upon Tyne 6,414 
			 Raleys Solicitors Barnsley 5,740 
			 Union of Democratic Mineworkers Mansfield 4,627 
			 Thompsons Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 4,318 
			 Hugh James Respiratory Disease Dept 3,743 
			 Avalon Solicitors Warrington 3,379 
			 Watson Burton LLP Newcastle Upon Tyne 3,117 
			 Graysons Solicitors Sheffield 2,673 
			 Beresfords Solicitors Doncaster (Scottish Claims) 1,499 
			 Delta Legal Manchester 1,471 
			 Barber and Co Liverpool 1,446 
			 Gorman Hamilton Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 1,249 
			 TLW Solicitors North Shields 1,242 
			 Thompsons Solicitors Edinburgh - Scottish Claims Only 1,215 
			 Beresfords Solicitors Doncaster (UDM Only) 1,172 
			 Corries York York 1,007 
			 Randell Lloyd Jenkins and Martin Llanelli 933 
			 Corries Solicitors Glasgow - Scottish Claims Only 833 
			 Ingrams Solicitors Hull - COPD Only 802 
			 Moss Solicitors Loughborough 760 
			 Kidd and Spoor Harper Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 721 
			 Towells Solicitors Wakefield 702 
			 Ashton Morton Slack LLP Sheffield 672 
			 Birchall Blackburn Preston 660 
			 1 Legal Solicitors Swansea 620 
			 Hilary Meredith Solicitors Wilmslow 608 
			 Ashton Morton Slack LLP AMS UDM Claims Only 587 
			 Saffmans Solicitors Leeds 470 
			 Moss Solicitors Moss UDM Claims Only 465 
			 Shaw and Co Solicitors Doncaster 426 
			 Atteys Rotherham 417 
			 O H Parsons and Partners Solicitors London 412 
			 Recompense Limited Totnes 399 
			 Bailey Bravo Jobling London 389 
			 Latham and Co Solicitors Leicester 363 
			 Morisons Solicitors Edinburgh - Scottish Claims Only 344 
			 BHP LAW Belmont 339 
			 Simpson Millar Solicitors Leeds 335 
			 Onyems and Partners Essex 312 
			 McConville O'Neill Solicitors Glasgow - Scottish 299 
			 Irwin Mitchell Solicitors Sheffield 288 
			 Meloy Whittle Robinson Preston 286 
			 BRM Solicitors Chesterfield 282 
			 Avalon Solicitors Manchester (Scottish Only) 277 
			 Oxley and Coward Solicitors Rotherham 228 
			 Mortons Solicitors Sunderland 199 
			 Cordner Lewis Solicitors Cardiff 184 
			 Mark Gilbert Morse Newcastle Upon Tyne 173 
			 Gorman Hamilton Solicitors Newcastle - SPSSG only 157 
			 Total  70,358 
		
	
	
		
			  Coal compensation claims where applications have been made under the DOROS scheme 
			  Chronic Obstructive  Pulmonary Disease 
			  Claimants'  representatives  Location  Total DOROS  claims 
			 Beresfords Solicitors Doncaster 16,337 
			 Hugh James Respiratory Disease Dept 11,021 
			 Raleys Solicitors Barnsley 9,564 
			 Avalon Solicitors Warrington 9,087 
			 Barber and = Co Liverpool 5,125 
			 Browell Smith and Co Newcastle Upon Tyne 4,486 
			 Delta Legal Manchester 4,214 
			 Thompsons Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 3,701 
			 Avalon Solicitors Manchester (Scottish Only) 2,696 
			 BRM Solicitors Chesterfield 2,394 
			 Thompsons Solicitors Edinburgh - Scottish claims only 2,256 
			 Ashton Morton Slack LLP Sheffield 2,127 
			 Mark Gilbert Morse Newcastle Upon Tyne 1,707 
			 Randell Lloyd Jenkins and Martin Llanelli 1,578 
			 Hilary Meredith Solicitors Wilmslow 1,483 
			 Ingrams Solicitors Hull - COPD Only 1,330 
			 Watson Burton LLP Newcastle Upon Tyne 1,282 
			 Corries York York 1,201 
			 1 Legal Solicitors Swansea 1,197 
			 Onyems and Partners Essex 927 
			 Bailey Bravo Jobling London 880 
			 Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers Victoria 783 
			 Beresfords Solicitors Doncaster (Scottish Claims) 772 
			 Graysons Solicitors Sheffield 734 
			 Corries Solicitors Glasgow - Scottish Claims Only 700 
			 Mark Gilbert Morse Newcastle Upon Tyne (Scottish Only) 691 
			 Cordner Lewis Solicitors Cardiff 686 
			 TLW Solicitors North Shields 676 
			 Kidd and Spoor Harper Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 628 
			 Birchall Blackburn Preston 576 
			 Wake Smith and Tofields Solicitors Sheffield 539 
			 Recompense Limited Totnes 514 
			 McConville O'Neill Solicitors Glasgow - Scottish 403 
			 Atteys Rotherham 327 
			 Simpson Millar Solicitors Leeds 319 
			 Raleys Solicitors Barnsley (Scottish Claims) 300 
			 SIS Law Menai Bridge 288 
			 MK Legal LLP Solicitors Milton Keynes 226 
			 Gorman Hamilton Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 216 
			 Union of Democratic Mineworkers Mansfield 213 
			 Meloy Whittle Robinson Preston 197 
			 Shaw and Co Solicitors Doncaster 182 
			 Irwin Mitchell Solicitors Sheffield 177 
			 Moss Solicitors Loughborough 175 
			 Irwin Mitchell Solicitors St Peters House (Scottish COPD claims only) 172 
			 Corries Solicitors York Scottish claims only 156 
			 MLM Solicitors Cardiff 145 
			 Marrons Solicitors Newcastle Upon Tyne 141 
			 Wake Smith and Tofields Solicitors Sheffield - UDM Claims Only 135 
			 T S Edwards and Son Solicitors Ystrad Mynach 129 
			 Total  95,793

Heating: Fuels

Charles Kennedy: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change whether he plans further regulation of the heating fuels sector; and if he will make a statement.

Joan Ruddock: holding answer 9 September 2009
	The Gas Act 1986 (as amended), which amongst other things set up the gas regulatory bodies, exempted heating oil and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) from its provisions. The Gas Act principally addressed the issues of setting up a regulatory regime to ensure that the national transmission system for gas users was not exploited. In contrast, there is no natural monopoly in the transport of heating oil or LPG by road. The heating fuels market operates with a number of distributors competing for supply using alternative supply sources. In that sense, it is broadly similar to other products such as diesel and petrol. The Department therefore has no plans for the economic regulation of the heating fuels sector.
	The Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) which will encourage the uptake of renewable heat generation, to meet our renewable energy and carbon targets, will be funded through a levy on suppliers of fossil fuel for heat. It is intended that the scheme will be introduced from April 2011 with the detail of the scheme being set out in secondary legislation under Section 100 of the Energy Act 2008.

Warm Front Scheme

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what criteria were used to assess the  (a) cost-effectiveness and  (b) reliability of Ideal ISAR (i) 24HE and (ii) 30He condensing boilers for use by Eaga plc under the Warm Front scheme.

David Kidney: The Ideal ISAR 24HE and 30HE boilers were approved by DECC's predecessor Department, DEFRA, for use on the Warm Front Scheme at the start of the current phase of the scheme in 2005.
	The Ideal ISAR boiler and other boilers were reviewed by the Grant Aided Installer Network (GAIN) who concluded that the ISAR range of boilers was the most reliable and cost effective on the market at the time.
	Eaga, the scheme manager, and the Department continually reviews feedback from customers, installers, inspectors and the scheme aftercare providers to identify major reliability issues with any of the products used on the scheme.

Warm Front Scheme

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what representations he has received on Eaga plc's commercial interest in Warm Sure Ltd. in relation to the Warm Front Scheme.

David Kidney: The use of WarmSure for the provision of Warm Front aftercare services was agreed with Eaga as part of their contract with DECC to deliver the Warm Front Scheme.
	It is not possible to provide information on third party representations specifically in relation to Eaga's commercial interest in WarmSure, without incurring disproportionate cost.

Bovine Tuberculosis: Disease Control

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of implementing statutory measures to control bovine tuberculosis in each of the next five years; and what estimate he has made of the likely reduction in such costs consequent on control measures introduced by his Department.

Jim Fitzpatrick: Forecasting spend on bovine TB is extremely difficult not least because there has often been significant year to year fluctuations in the number of infected cattle disclosed through testing and slaughterhouse surveillance. Spend on testing and compensation forms a major part of our TB control costs—future spend in these areas is highly dependent on the number of TB infected cattle disclosed and prevailing open market prices for cattle (since compensation paid through table valuations is directly linked to open market prices).

Bovine Tuberculosis: Disease Control

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the cost to his Department and its predecessor of  (a) compensation paid directly to farmers for removal of animals,  (b) veterinary tuberculin testing,  (c) haulage for removal of animals,  (d) abattoir and official veterinary surgeon services in respect of slaughter,  (e) on-farm slaughter,  (f) disposal and incineration and  (g) valuation fees was in respect of the implementation of statutory testing and slaughter under bovine tuberculosis regulations of (i) cattle classed as bovine tuberculosis reactors, inconclusives or dangerous contact animals and (ii) all other mammals (A) between 1986 and 1996 and (B) since 1997.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The following table provides a summary of TB related expenditure incurred by DEFRA in relation to compensation, testing, haulage/disposal of livestock compulsorily slaughtered on TB control grounds, and valuers' fees. The way in which financial data has been collected/collated means that we are not able to provide a detailed breakdown of spend, in the form you have requested, for the years prior to 1999.
	I am unable to provide details of Government staff costs related to 'in-abattoir' controls: policy responsibility for a key element of this work (verifying that meat is fit for human consumption) rests with the Food Standards Agency, rather than DEFRA. Also, the costs of on-farm slaughter for the small minority of cattle unfit to be sent to licensed abattoirs are not recorded separately.
	
		
			  (£ million) 
			   Compensation paid( 1)  Haulage / Disposal  Valuers fees  Cattle testing( 2) 
			 2007 13.6 1.3 0.0> 32.6 
			 2006 16.4 1.2 0.2 37.7 
			 2005 31.4 1.0 0.5 35 
			 2004 23.7 0.9 0.4 36.4 
			 2003 25.7 0.7 0.5 33.2 
			 2002 21.7 0.7 0.4 24.7 
			 2001 4.6 0.2 0.1 5.4 
			 2000 5.7 0.5 0.1 13.3 
			 1999 3.4 0.1 0.1 17.6 
			 1998 3.6 — — 7.3 
			 1997 2.4 — — 5.5 
			 1996 2.3 — — — 
			 1995 2.0 — — — 
			 1994 2.0 — — — 
			 1993 2.1 — — — 
			 1992 0.7 — — — 
			 1991 0.7 — — — 
			 1990 1.1 — — — 
			 1989 0.6 — — — 
			 1988 0.4 — — — 
			 1987 0.5 — — — 
			 1986 0.3 — — — 
			 (1). Compensation includes payments to farmers for 'reactors' and 'direct contact' animals which are compulsorily slaughtered, and non-bovine species. (2) Cattle testing—the cost of carrying out the testing of cattle for TB by arranging, assessing and monitoring tests, conducting investigations of incident herds and diagnostic testing by Local veterinary Inspectors across GB.  Notes: 1. Data from 1999 has been taken from the DEFRA Oracle Financial System. Information pre1999 has been taken from the respective annual reports of the Chief Veterinary Officer. 2. Data is provisional and subject to change. 3. DEFRA holds the testing budget for the whole of GB. 4. The 1997 figure is for the calendar year - figures for 1998/99 onwards are per financial year. 5. Valuers' fees - expenditure in 2007 and 2008 was below £100,000. 
		
	
	With regards to livestock disposal costs, no such estimate has been made. For most cattle compulsorily slaughtered on TB control grounds, DEFRA has received a net payment from abattoirs rather than incurred a cost.
	MHS officials inspect carcasses of such cattle when slaughtered in licensed abattoirs, a small proportion of TB affected cattle are condemned as unfit for human consumption e.g. if TB lesions are identified in more than one part of the carcase. In such cases DEFRA does makes a payment to the abattoir to cover its disposal costs. It is not possible to provide details of slaughter costs in the form requested: typically an abattoir will receive batches of cattle being slaughtered on disease control grounds rather than single animals—if one (or more) of these animals is condemned, the cost to DEFRA will be offset by the total salvage value received from those passed as fit for human consumption.

Departmental Buildings

Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much  (a) his Department and  (b) its agencies spent on (i) electricity, (ii) heat, (iii) water and sewerage services and (iv) disposal of waste on the latest date for which figures are available; what proportion of such (A) electricity and (B) heat was from renewable sources; what the weight was of such waste; what proportion of such waste was recycled; at what cost such waste was recycled; and what area of office floor space (1) his Department and (2) its agencies own or lease.

Dan Norris: The following amounts were spent on energy and water in 2007-08.
	
		
			  Cost  (£) 
			  Organisation  Electricity  Gas  Oil  Water 
			 DEFRA 1,171,745 199,292 29,101 89,651 
			 Animal Health 192,356 59,655 9,853 58,152 
			 MFA 15,379 3,986 2,034 2,820 
			 RPA 537,396 113,370 18,277 72,001 
			 CEFAS 379,799 90,529 0 165,069 
			 FERA (formerly CSL) 1,198,146 460,979 291 81,782 
			 VLA 1,352,292 996,636 229,056 117,190 
			 Total 4,847,113 1,924,447 288,612 586,665 
		
	
	Data for 2008-09 have not yet been verified by OGC therefore cannot be released.
	DEFRA is unable to identify the cost for waste disposal and recycling as this activity is part of a composite facilities management contract specifically engineered to offer value for money, accordingly the individual costs for waste disposal and recycling are not identified. Similarly, the costs of recycling and recovered waste set out below are not individually identifiable.
	In 2007-08 55.9 per cent. of electricity purchased was from renewable sources. DEFRA did not purchase any gas/heat from renewable sources.
	The DEFRA estate generated 4,816 tonnes of waste, 29 per cent. of the waste was recycled (recycled, composted, re-used externally).
	It should be noted that DEFRA incinerates approximately 30 per cent. of its waste, from which significant quantity of heat and energy is recovered. Current Sustainable Development Commission reporting does not acknowledge energy recovery from waste incineration as recycling or waste recovery under current Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE) guidelines. It is expected that energy recovered from incineration will be included in future SOGE targets. DEFRA recovers 60 per cent. of the waste generated (recycled, composted, reused externally, incinerated with energy recovery).
	DEFRA and its core Executive agencies own and lease 230,000 square metres of office space.

Dogs: Quarantine

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will relax the quarantine rules in respect of rescue dogs returning to the UK from service overseas; and what representations he has received in respect of the quarantine of rescue dog Darcy of the urban search and rescue section of the Essex fire and rescue service.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Government recognises the excellent work carried out by search and rescue dogs in responding to overseas disasters, such as the recent earthquake in Indonesia, and their rapid and valuable response to such emergencies.
	We also appreciate the difficulty the current quarantine requirements cause for owners of these rescue dogs, particularly the rule requiring that dogs coming into the UK from certain countries, including Indonesia, are placed in quarantine on their arrival. This long standing rule is in place to protect the UK from the incursion of serious diseases such as rabies.
	DEFRA has not received any formal representation in respect of the rescue dog Darcy. However, we are happy to consider ways to support rescue dogs, consistent with the law and the overriding need to protect the UK population from disease.

Farmers: Income

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the average annual income of  (a) farmers and  (b) hill farmers in (i) England and (ii) Cumbria was in each year since 1997.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The following tables show Farm Business Income(1) (FBI) for England and Cumbria for all farm types and for grazing livestock farms in the less favoured areas (LFA). Farm Business Income is the most robust measure of income but is not available prior to 2003-04. Equivalent data are also shown for Net Farm Income(2) (NFI).
	(1) Farm Business Income represents the financial return to all unpaid labour (farmers and spouses, non-principal partners and directors and their spouses and family workers) and on all their capital invested in the farm business, including land and buildings.
	(2) Net farm income is defined as the return to the principal farmer and spouse alone for their manual and managerial labour and on the tenant type capital of the business. An imputed rent is deducted for owner-occupied farms as is a charge for other unpaid labour.
	
		
			  All farm types 
			  (£ per farm) 
			   England  Cumbria 
			  March/February  Net farm income  Farm business income  Net farm income  Farm business income 
			 2007-08 38,600 48,100 17,800 25,600 
			 2006-07 26,700 34,400 6,700 15,600 
			 2005-06 21,100 28,600 19,100 18,500 
			 2004-05 21,200 28,300 18,400 18,600 
			 2003-04 29,500 36,800 17,800 18,400 
			 2002-03 16,600 n/a 14,000 n/a 
			 2001-02 14,900 n/a 22,800 n/a 
			 2000-01 10,600 n/a 14,300 n/a 
			 1999-2000 8,700 n/a 9,100 n/a 
			 1998-99 11,500 n/a 10,600 n/a 
			 1997-98 15,200 n/a 14,500 n/a 
			  Source: Business Survey, England 
		
	
	
		
			  LFA grazing livestock 
			  (£ per farm) 
			   England  Cumbria 
			  March/February  Net farm income  Farm business income  Net farm income  Farm business income 
			 2007-08 5,000 10,400 6,000 9,800 
			 2006-07 6,100 10,500 2,200 8,800 
			 2005-06 11,800 15,800 15,700 15,100 
			 2004-05 13,400 16,200 19,600 18,900 
			 2003-04 15,000 17,400 17,500 16,200 
			 2002-03 17,700 n/a 20,100 n/a 
			 2001-02 7,400 n/a 17,700 n/a 
			 2000-01 5,900 n/a 14,200 n/a 
			 1999-2000 5,600 n/a 10,700 n/a 
			 1998-99 6,200 n/a 12,400 n/a 
			 1997-98 12,700 n/a 21,500 n/a 
			  Source: Farm Business Survey, England 
		
	
	 Note:
	The Farm Business Survey sample covers businesses with a Standard Labour Requirement (SLR) of at least 0.5, i.e. a size considered sufficient to occupy a farmer for at least half their time.

Nitrate Vulnerable Zones

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the financial effect on farmers of operating inside the new Nitrate Vulnerable Zones with effect from 1 January 2010.

Huw Irranca-Davies: The Nitrate Pollution Prevention Regulations (2008), which implement the EU Nitrates Directive in England, increase the area designated as nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZs) to approximately 70 per cent. of the country and tighten the mandatory action programme of measures that apply within these zones. The impact assessment estimates the total annual cost to farmers of complying with the regulations to be £48.5 million-£68.6 million. The UK's successful negotiation of a derogation from the livestock manure N farm limit, one of the more demanding requirements set by the Nitrates Directive, means these costs could be reduced by £16.9 million to £21.7 million per annum.
	The impact assessment can be downloaded via
	www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/em/uksiem_20082349_en.pdf

Overseas Territories

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate he has made of the net cost to the Exchequer of each UK overseas territory.

Chris Bryant: The following Government Departments meet the costs of, and provide the majority of the assistance to, the Overseas Territories: the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), the Department for International Development (DFID), the Ministry of Defence (MOD), the Department for Transport (DFT) and the Department for Environment Food and Agriculture (DEFRA).
	The UK is responsible for 14 Overseas Territories. The following figures cover staff and administration costs in support of defence, sustainable development, safety and security, good governance and the environment.
	
		
			  Department  Cost (£ million) (2008-09) 
			  FCO  
			 Overseas Territories Directorate—Home costs 2.5 
			 Overseas Territories Directorate—Overseas costs (including capital costs) 3.1 
			 Overseas Territories Directorate—Programme allocation (Overseas Territories Programme Fund) 6.5 
			 Gibraltar—Home costs 0.3 
			 Gibraltar—Overseas costs 1.1 
			   
			  DFID  
			 Administration costs (home and overseas) 2.1 
			 Assistance to Pitcairn, Montserrat, St. Helena, Ascension,Tristan da Cunha, TCI and cross-territory projects 55.87 
			   
			  MOD  
			 British Forces in Falklands and Ascension 78.51 
			 Gibraltar 55.60 
			 British Indian Overseas Territories 2.3 
			   
			  DFT  
			 Programme and running costs for aviation and maritime safety and air accident investigations 3.1 
			   
			  DEFRA  
			 Costs to Kew and Joint Nature Conservation Committee 0.5 
			 British Antarctic Survey (BAS) costs 4.0 
			 Darwin Projects 0.04 
			   
			 Total 215.52

South Africa: Politics and Government

Adrian Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps his Department is taking to encourage  (a) South Africa and  (b) the South African Development Community to seek to ensure President Mugabe complies with the terms of the power-sharing agreement with Morgan Tsvangirai.

Ivan Lewis: We are in regular touch with both South Africa and Southern African Development Community (SADC) as a part of our contact with international partners on Zimbabwe. The SADC, as sponsor and guarantor of the Global Political Agreement (GPA), has a key role to play in supporting reform in Zimbabwe. South Africa, although no longer in the SADC chair, remains closely involved in the organisation's discussions. It is a member of the new SADC Troika on Zimbabwe. President Zuma visited Harare in August 2009 and called for the full and timely implementation of the GPA. He reiterated this jointly with the EU at the EU-Africa summit on 11 September 2009.
	My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister discussed Zimbabwe with President Zuma when they met at the G8 in June 2009, as did my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary in his telephone call with the South African Foreign Minister in July 2009.
	My noble Friend, the then Minister for Africa, Asia and the UN, Lord Malloch-Brown, regularly encouraged SADC Ministers to support implementation of the GPA, most recently in the margins of the World Economic Forum meeting in Cape Town in June 2009. We will continue to make working with the region to promote reform in Zimbabwe a priority.

Accident and Emergency Departments

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent assessment he has made of the efficiency and effectiveness of those accident and emergency departments in England whose annual volume of attendances is below 55,000; and if he will make a statement.

Mike O'Brien: It is for primary care trusts to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the accident and emergency (A&E) services they commission. The Department has set an operational standard that 98 per cent, of patients should not spend more than four hours in A and E departments. National annual performance against the standard was 98.1 per cent., in 2008-09. Performance of individual trusts is published on the Department's website, but performance of individual A and E departments is not collected centrally. As seen in the 2008 Healthcare Commission survey of A and E, nationally patient ratings of care are continue to be positive—patient satisfaction with the overall quality of care is high: 88 per cent., rate it as "excellent", "very good" or "good".

Charities

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what grants his Department made to charitable organisations in each of the last five years.

Ann Keen: Information on all Department grant funding to charitable organisations is not available in the format requested from central records and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
	Tables showing grant awards from the funding years 2004-05 up to the current funding year 2009-10 with the identifiable data available including; Social Enterprise Pathfinders, Social Enterprise Investment Fund, Children's Hospice and Hospice at Home, Dignity in Care (one year capital awards), Tobacco policy programme, Section 64 General Scheme of Grants, Innovation, Excellence and Service Development Fund, Strategic Partner Programme and the Opportunities for Volunteering grant scheme, have been placed in the Library.

Health Services: Christchurch

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects the sale of the vacant premises of the former health centre at Saxon Square, Christchurch to be completed.

Mike O'Brien: Following the decision of the local national health service trust not to utilise the property and the landlord's decision not to accept a surrender of the lease, agreement is being finalised with the landlord on the extent of repair works to be undertaken in compliance with a previously served Repairs Notice. Once agreement is reached, the works will be undertaken and the property formally marketed. The availability of the property has for some time been included on the Electronic Property Information Mapping Service (e-PIMS)—the central database of Government civil estate managed by the Office of Government Commerce.

Midwives: Training

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many student midwives were in receipt of a bursary in each of the last five years; what the average bursary paid to a student midwife was in each such year in  (a) cash and  (b) real terms; how much was paid out to student midwives in bursaries in each such year, expressed in (i) cash and (ii) real terms; what the cost was of all bursaries paid to student midwives; and by how much in real terms the bursary changed in each of those years.

Ann Keen: The number of midwifery students who held a bursary and the average bursary paid to those students can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  Academic year  Number of bursary holders( 1)  Average basic bursary in cash terms( 1)  (£)  Average basic bursary in 2009 prices( 1,2)  (£)  Average bursary (inc. allowances) in cash terms( 1)  (£)  Average bursary (inc. allowances) in 2009 prices( 1,2)  (£) 
			 2004-05 3,738 5,326 5,882 5,521 6,097 
			 2005-06 3,901 5,437 5,886 5,657 6,124 
			 2006-07 3,812 5,494 5,788 5,716 6,022 
			 2007-08 3,996 5,588 5,718 5,813 5,948 
			 2008-09 4,265 5,524 5,524 5,715 5,715 
			 (1) Includes EU students who are not eligible for a bursary and those who receive a nil award after income assessment. (2) Based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) at April in the middle of the academic year i.e. CPI for 2004-05 taken at April 2005.  Sources: Office for National Statistics NHS Business Services Authority 
		
	
	The average bursary awarded to students reflects the change in the proportion of diploma to degree students because bursary awards to degree students are means-tested. Degree students are also eligible for a student loan. Since 2004, the number of midwifery degree programmes commissioned by the national health service has increased and the number of diploma programmes reduced significantly.
	The total cost of the bursaries can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  Academic year  Total spend (exc. allowances) in cash terms (£)  Total spend (exc. allowances) at 2009 prices( 1)  (£)  Total spend (inc. allowances) in cash terms (£)  Total spend (inc. allowances) at 2009 prices( 1)  (£) 
			 2004-05 19,908,213 21,984,897 20,637,109 22,789,826 
			 2005-06 21,209,791 22,961,632 22,067,168 23,889,825 
			 2006-07 20,944,277 22,066,650 21,787,618 22,955,184 
			 2007-08 22,327,766 22,846,534 23,228,490 23,768,185 
			 2008-09 23,560,311 23,560,311 24,373,689 24,373,689 
			 (1) Based on CPI at April in the middle of the academic year i.e. CPI for 2004-05 taken at April 2005.  Sources: Office for National Statistics NHS Business Services Authority 
		
	
	The rates for the basic NHS bursary, at 2009 prices, are set out in the following table. In addition to the NHS bursary, degree students are eligible for a non-means tested student loan.
	
		
			   Diploma  Degree 
			   London( 1)( ) (£)  Elsewhere( 1)( ) (£)  London( 1)( ) (£)  Elsewhere( 1)( ) (£)  Parental home( 1)( ) (£) 
			 2008 (new)(2) 7,629.00 6,531.00 3,306.00 2,739.00 2,287.00 
			 2008 (existing)(2) 7,374.00 6,275.00 3,050.00 2,483.00 2,031.00 
			 2007 (new)(2) 7,615.93 6,520.05 3,299.93 2,734.08 2,282.84 
			 2007 (existing)(2) 7,361.15 6,264.24 3,045.14 2,478.27 2,055.68 
			 2006 7,406.73 6,303.62 3,063.84 2,493.84 2,068.19 
			 2005 7,425.53 6,319.11 3,071.32 2,499.71 2,045.02 
			 2004 7,390.06 6,289.06 3,056.74 2,488.02 2,035.25 
			 (1) Based on CPI at the April in the middle of the academic year i.e. CPI for 2004-05 taken at April 2005. (2) In 2007 certain allowances were removed from the scheme to make it compliant with age discrimination legislation. Existing students remained on the previous rules and new rates introduced for new entrants.  Source: Office for National Statistics

NHS Foundation Trusts: Governing Bodies

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people serve on the governing council of a foundation hospital; and by what method they are selected.

Mike O'Brien: The National Health Service Act 2006 does not stipulate the number of governors at an NHS foundation trust. Each NHS foundation trust decides how many governors should be included in its constitution. The members of the NHS foundation trust must elect the majority of the governors. The other governors are appointed by organisations such as the primary care trust, the local authority and the university, where the NHS foundation trust has medical or dental school. Schedule 7 of The National Health Service Act 2006, sets out the statutory requirements for an NHS foundation trust's constitution.

NHS: Finance

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many NHS trusts are borrowing money from his Department; what interest rates are being charged on each loan; what the term of each loan is; and how much interest has been paid on each to date.

Mike O'Brien: The Department makes loans to national health service trusts and national health service foundation trusts. The information requested is provided in the following table.
	
		
			  NHS trust name  National loan fund rate (fixed for term) (percentage)  Term of  loan  (year s/month s)  Interest paid to date (£000) 
			 Ashford and St Peter's Hospitals NHS trust 5.40 6 years 1,641 
			 Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS trust 5.45 5 years 541 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS trust 3.97 3 years 89 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 4 years 1,773 
			 Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS trust 4.02 25 years 0 
			 Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.70 25 years 180 
			 Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.90 25 years 803 
			 Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation trust 4.06 25 years 0 
			 Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 3.04 10 years 152 
			 Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS trust 4.01 5 years 265 
			 Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS trust 5.40 6 years 2,971 
			 Buckinghamshire Hospitals NHS trust 4.88 5 years 324 
			 Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation trust 4.48 15 years 358 
			 Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.40 25 years 2,578 
			 Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 3.94 25 years 153 
			 Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 2.98 10 years 0 
			 Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 2.67 4 years 115 
			 Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 2.92 5 years 154 
			 Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 2.86 10 years 0 
			 Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.85 10 years 1,144 
			 Chesterfield royal Hospital NHS Foundation trust 2.84 10 years 0 
			 City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation trust 4.25 25 years 736 
			 City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation trust 4.30 10 years 250 
			 Dartford and Gravesham NHS trust 1.90 5 years 0 
			 Derby Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.85 12 years 1,447 
			 Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 5.05 15 years 402 
			 Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 2.45 10 years 0 
			 Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation trust 5.50 15 years 255 
			 East and North Hertfordshire NHS trust 5.45 5 years 844 
			 East and North Hertfordshire NHS trust 4.02 25 years 0 
			 East Cheshire NHS trust 5.50 3 years 635 
			 East Cheshire NHS trust 2.39 8 years 30 
			 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS trust 2.39 6 years 2months 11 
			 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS trust 2.28 6 years 0 
			 East Sussex Hospitals NHS trust 3.48 10 years 3months 38 
			 East Sussex Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 4 years 405 
			 George Eliot Hospital NHS trust 5.45 3 years 689 
			 Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.95 25 years 1,972 
			 Great Western Ambulance Service NHS trust 2.82 5 years 3months 49 
			 Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 5.45 4 years 304 
			 Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.69 25 years 17 
			 Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.08 5 years 141 
			 Hereford Hospitals NHS trust 2.69 10 years 11 
			 Hereford Hospitals NHS trust 5.50 3 years 298 
			 Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation trust 5.60 23 years 364 
			 Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.90 10 years 81 
			 Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.90 25 years 204 
			 Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS trust 3.65 20 years 225 
			 Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 5 years 906 
			 Humber Mental Health Teaching NHS trust 4.07 24 years 8months 25 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS trust 5.35 7 years 2,663 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Foundation trust 5.34 1 years 196 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Foundation trust 5.21 20 years 129 
			 London Ambulance service NHS trust 2.65 8 years 0 
			 London Ambulance service NHS trust 2.73 8 years 2months 5 
			 Mayday Healthcare NHS trust 5.50 3 years 999 
			 Mid Essex Hospital services NHS trust 5.45 5 years 1,958 
			 Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS trust 5.29 3 years 1,526 
			 Moorfields eye Hospital NHS Foundation trust 5.05 10 years 97 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.65 25 years 270 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.60 10 years 768 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.50 10 years 273 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.45 15 years 89 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.40 25 years 823 
			 Newham University Hospital NHS trust 1.90 5 years 0 
			 Norfolk and Waveney NHS Foundation trust 3.87 20 years 113 
			 North Bristol NHS trust 5.05 20 years 5,781 
			 North Bristol NHS trust 4.02 25 years 0 
			 North Cumbria Acute Hospital NHS trust 5.20 15 years 1,447 
			 North Cumbria Acute Hospital NHS trust 5.10 14 years 6months 38 
			 North Cumbria Acute Hospital NHS trust 4.34 14 years 25 
			 North Essex Partnership NHS Foundation trust 5.33 10 years 0 
			 North Middlesex University Hospital NHS trust 5.45 5 years 1,622 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 5 years 2,577 
			 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS trust 2.91 10 years 0 
			 Oxford Radcliffe Hospital NHS trust 5.40 6 years 2,231 
			 Oxford Radcliffe Hospital NHS trust 2.69 10 years 107 
			 Oxford Radcliffe Hospital NHS trust 4.19 10 years 366 
			 Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Health NHS Foundation trust 5.45 4 years 252 
			 Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Health NHS Foundation trust 3.92 25 years 0 
			 Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation trust 5.55 5 years 358 
			 Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS trust 4.07 24 years 8months 48 
			 Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS trust 4.05 24 years 6months 0 
			 Plymouth Hospitals NHS trust 2.69 10 years 94 
			 Portsmouth Hospitals NHS trust 2.48 7 years 6months 0 
			 Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS trust 5.45 5 years 1,476 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn NHS trust 4.86 8 years 279 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn NHS trust 5.50 3 years 572 
			 Rob Jones and A Hunt Orthopaedic NHS trust 4.85 10 years 41 
			 Rob Jones and A Hunt Orthopaedic NHS trust 5.50 3 years 307 
			 Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation trust 4.12 18 years 247 
			 Royal Bolton Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 5.50 3 years 409 
			 Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS trust 5.32 7 years 2,607 
			 Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS trust 1.16 2 years 15 
			 Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation trust 4.55 20 years 2,132 
			 Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation trust 5.05 25 years 980 
			 Royal united Hospital Bath NHS trust 5.05 20 years 4,189 
			 Salisbury NHS Foundation trust 1.88 5 years 0 
			 Scarborough and North East Yorks NHS trust 5.45 5 years 827 
			 Scarborough and North East Yorks NHS trust 5.20 4 years 6months 66 
			 Scarborough and North East Yorks NHS trust 3.98 4 years 39 
			 Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation trust 4.80 25 years 995 
			 Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS trust 5.50 3 years 1,116 
			 South Central Ambulance service NHS trust 4.88 5 years 160 
			 South Central Ambulance Service NHS trust 3.48 10 years 3months 89 
			 South Central Ambulance Service NHS trust 1.90 5 years 0 
			 South Warwickshire Gen Hosps NHS trust 5.35 8 years 2,041 
			 Southampton University Hospitals NHS trust 4.85 10 years 6months 247 
			 Southampton University Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 4 years 2,532 
			 Southampton University Hospitals NHS trust 4.19 10 years 448 
			 Southampton University Hospitals NHS trust 4.85 10 years 378 
			 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS trust 1.90 5 years 0 
			 St George's Healthcare NHS trust 5.45 5 years 3,675 
			 St George's Healthcare NHS trust 5.20 4 years 6months 21 
			 St George's Healthcare NHS trust 3.98 4 years 238 
			 Stockport NHS Foundation trust 4.80 25 years 3,396 
			 Stockport NHS Foundation trust 3.43 25 years 57 
			 Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS trust 4.95 25 years 4,999 
			 The Rotherham NHS Foundation trust 2.57 10 years 0 
			 The Rotherham NHS Foundation trust 3.23 20 years 160 
			 Trafford Healthcare NHS trust 5.50 3 years 154 
			 Trafford Healthcare NHS trust 4.19 10 years 179 
			 University Hospital of South Manchester Foundation trust 3.51 20 years 89 
			 University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS trust 5.31 5 years 737 
			 University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS trust 5.50 3 years 513 
			 Warrington and Halton Hospital NHS Foundation trust 5.50 3 years 758 
			 Warrington and Halton Hospital NHS Foundation trust 4.88 5 years 209 
			 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 5 years 1,211 
			 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS trust 5.40 10 years 798 
			 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS trust 5.40 9 years 6months 710 
			 West Middlesex University NHS trust 5.31 5 years 890 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS trust 5.50 3 years 177 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS trust 4.69 5 years 222 
			 Western Sussex NHS trust 5.35 8 years 1,976 
			 Western Sussex NHS trust 4.07 7 years 61 
			 Western Sussex NHS trust 5.20 14 years 1,787 
			 Western Sussex NHS trust 5.15 7 years 6months 99 
			 Weston Area NHS trust 1.40 3 years 6 
			 Weston Area NHS trust 5.32 7 years 808 
			 Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS trust 5.30 9 years 3,074 
			 Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS trust 5.45 4 years 507 
			 Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS trust 5.45 5 years 2,703

Tuberculosis

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the  (a) location,  (b) date of diagnosis,  (c) date of completion of treatment,  (d) age,  (e) occupation and  (f) suspected cause of infection was of each person who contracted Mycobacterium bovis in each of the last 10 years; and how many persons were diagnosed with tuberculosis complex in each such year.

Ann Keen: The available information is shown in the following tables. The exact location is not available because of the risk of deductive disclosure. These data are available by strategic health authority (SHA) region. Data are therefore presented by SHA region.
	
		
			  Table 1: Isolates of Mycobacterium bovis (M.  bovis) from humans by region, England, 1998  to  2007 
			   Year 
			  Region  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  Total 
			 East Midlands 3 5 0 3 0 1 2 1 3 1 19 
			 East of England 3 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 3 1 21 
			 London 6 3 4 6 2 5 5 4 4 5 44 
			 North East(1) — — 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 1 8 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber(1) — — 4 3 2 1 0 2 1 1 14 
			 Northern and Yorkshire(1) 2 1 — — — — — — — — 3 
			 North West 1 3 1 1 0 1 2 1 3 2 15 
			 South East 3 4 2 0 4 2 0 3 3 5 26 
			 South West 5 8 5 3 3 2 0 2 6 4 38 
			 West Midlands 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 6 2 4 26 
			 England 24 28 19 24 17 15 14 24 26 23 214 
			 (1) Change of region boundaries 1 April 2002 (boundaries recalculated for 2000 and 2001).  Source: M. bovis database 27 October 2008, Health Protection Agency (HPA) 
		
	
	The data on date of diagnosis and date of completion of treatment are not available because they are not part of HPA routine data outputs.
	
		
			  Table 2: Isolates of Mycobacterium bovis in humans by  age group, United Kingdom, 1998 to 2 007 
			   Age group (years)  
			   0 to 14  15 to 44  45 to 64  65+  Total( 1) 
			 1998 0 7 10 21 38 
			 1999 0 8 16 17 41 
			 2000 0 7 10 12 29 
			 2001 0 5 8 20 33 
			 2002 0 3 2 13 18 
			 2003 1 2 6 12 21 
			 2004 0 8 3 9 20 
			 2005 0 12 10 17 39 
			 2006 0 7 4 22 33 
			 2007 0 9 3 15 27 
			 Total 1 68 72 158 299 
			 (1) Where age was known.  Source: M. bovis database 27 October 2008, HPA 
		
	
	These data are also available on the HPA website at:
	www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1225700808961
	The data on occupation and suspected cause of infection of each person who contracted M. bovis are not available because they are not part of the HPA routine data outputs.
	
		
			  Table 3: Number of culture confirmed cases with Mycobacterium Tuberculosis (MTB) complex, UK, 1998  to  2007 
			   Culture confirmed cases( 1)  of MTB complex  All TB cases 
			 1998 3,059 5,658 
			 1999 2,980 5,704 
			 2000 3,016 6,323 
			 2001 3,373 6,652 
			 2002 3,833 6,861 
			 2003 3,922 6,970 
			 2004 4,225 7,321 
			 2005 4,594 8,113 
			 2006 4,702 8,113 
			 2007 4,511 8,009 
			 (1) Notifications in ETS with matches to MycobNet laboratory data (culture confirmed results)  Source: Enhanced Tuberculosis Surveillance (ETS) and MycobNet, HPA

Crime

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to Table 6.02 in Home Office Statistical Bulletin 11/09, Crime in England and Wales 2008-09, what proportion of offences in each offence group has resulted in  (a) a charge or summons,  (b) a caution,  (c) a Penalty Notice for Disorder and  (d) an offence taken into consideration, in each year since 2002-03.

Alan Johnson: The information requested for the 10 offence groups and the overall total has been provided in the following table.
	
		
			  Percentage of offences resulting in a certain method of detection by offence group 
			   Percentage of offences recorded resulting in: 
			  Offence group and financial year  Charge or summons  Caution  Penalty notice for disorder  Offence taken into consideration 
			  Violence against the person 
			 2002-03 28 7 0 0 
			 2003-04 26 7 0 0 
			 2004-05 25 8 3 0 
			 2005-06 25 12 6 0 
			 2006-07 24 15 7 0 
			 2007-08 26 16 7 0 
			 2008-09 27 15 5 0 
			  
			  Sexual offences 
			 2002-03 28 4 0 0 
			 2003-04 26 4 0 0 
			 2004-05 24 4 0 0 
			 2005-06 25 5 0 1 
			 2006-07 24 5 0 0 
			 2007-08 25 6 0 0 
			 2008-09 26 5 0 0 
			  
			  Robbery 
			 2002-03 15 0 0 1 
			 2003-04 16 0 0 1 
			 2004-05 16 1 0 1 
			 2005-06 16 1 0 1 
			 2006-07 17 1 0 1 
			 2007-08 18 1 0 1 
			 2008-09 19 1 0 1 
			  
			  Burglary 
			 2002-03 7 0 0 4 
			 2003-04 7 1 0 4 
			 2004-05 7 1 0 5 
			 2005-06 7 1 0 5 
			 2006-07 7 1 0 6 
			 2007-08 7 1 0 6 
			 2008-09 7 1 0 6 
			  
			  Offences against vehicles 
			 2002-03 5 1 0 3 
			 2003-04 4 1 0 3 
			 2004-05 4 1 0 4 
			 2005-06 4 1 0 5 
			 2006-07 4 1 0 5 
			 2007-08 5 1 0 5 
			 2008-09 5 1 0 5 
			  
			  Other theft offences 
			 2002-03 14 4 0 1 
			 2003-04 13 4 0 1 
			 2004-05 12 5 0 1 
			 2005-06 12 5 2 2 
			 2006-07 11 6 3 2 
			 2007-08 12 6 4 2 
			 2008-09 14 6 4 2 
			  
			  Fraud and forgery 
			 2002-03 14 2 0 7 
			 2003-04 14 3 0 6 
			 2004-05 14 3 0 7 
			 2005-06 16 4 0 7 
			 2006-07 15 5 0 7 
			 2007-08 17 7 0 7 
			 2008-09 17 6 0 5 
			  
			  Criminal damage 
			 2002-03 7 3 0 0 
			 2003-04 6 3 0 0 
			 2004-05 6 3 0 0 
			 2005-06 6 4 1 1 
			 2006-07 6 5 2 1 
			 2007-08 6 5 2 1 
			 2008-09 7 5 1 1 
			  
			  Drug offences 
			 2002-03 51 34 0 0 
			 2003-04 49 32 0 0 
			 2004-05 39 34 0 0 
			 2005-06 33 23 0 0 
			 2006-07 30 21 0 0 
			 2007-08 28 21 0 0 
			 2008-09 30 20 0 0 
			  
			  Other offences 
			 2002-03 64 6 0 0 
			 2003-04 60 7 0 0 
			 2004-05 54 9 1 0 
			 2005-06 57 9 1 0 
			 2006-07 54 12 1 0 
			 2007-08 57 13 0 0 
			 2008-09 59 12 0 0 
			  
			  Total 
			 2002-03 13 4 0 2 
			 2003-04 13 4 0 2 
			 2004-05 13 5 1 2 
			 2005-06 13 6 2 2 
			 2006-07 13 7 3 2 
			 2007-08 14 7 3 2 
			 2008-09 15 7 2 2

Forced Marriage

Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which organisations in England and Wales in receipt of Government funding undertake work relating to forced marriage; and how much each has received from the Government in each of the last three years.

Alan Campbell: The following table contains information on organisations dealing with issues concerning forced marriage who received Government funding over the past three years.
	
		
			  £ 
			  Government Department  Organisation funded  Purpose of funding  Amount funded in 2007-08  Amount funded in 2008-09  Amount funded in 2009-10  Total funding 
			 Forced marriage Unit Changing lives Peer support to victims of FM and HBV 7,000 — — 7,000 
			 Forced marriage Unit Karma Nirvana Survivors Network and male victim support officer (2008-09) 15,000 28,000 — 43,000 
			 Forced marriage Unit Iranian, Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation (IKWRO) Campaign on FM targeting Iranian, Kurdish and Arabic communities — 28,000 — 28,000 
			 Forced marriage Unit Doli Project (Birmingham) Training for education welfare officers — 2,516 — 2,516 
			 Forced marriage Unit Refuge Study on service provision — 6,635 — 6,635 
			 Forced marriage Unit Ethnic Minority Foundation Website for young people — 25,000 — 25,000 
			 Forced marriage Unit ACPO Training DVD on FM — — 10,000 10,000 
			 Forced marriage Unit Domestic Programme Fund 8 organisations—yet to be announced — — 84,000 84,000 
			 GEO Ethnic Minority Foundation Forcedmarriage.net website — 6,000 — 6,000 
			 MoJ 11 organisations Forced Marriage IDVA pilot — — (1)— 220,000 
			 OCJR Victim and Witness Unit Thames Valley LCJB Victim support and service delivery 14,600 15,000 — 29,600 
			 OCJR Victim and Witness Unit Cleveland LCJB 'Way Forward' network — — 10,000 10,000 
			  Government Funding to Regional Government Offices and Welsh Assembly Government   
			 Welsh Assembly Government South Wales Police FM leaflets and training 4,000 9,000 — 13,000 
			 Welsh Assembly Government Henna Foundation Conference — — 12,000 12,000 
			 Government Office for the South West Safer Bristol training package — 2,740 4,600 7,340 
			 Government Office for the South West Bristol Somali Development Group FM support and counselling programme — — 10,000 10,000 
			 Government Office for the North East Cleveland Police Forced Marriage and Honour Based Violence Conference 2,000 — — 2,000 
			 Government Office for the North East Safe in Tees Valley and Central Office of Information Forced Marriage Conference and related promotional activity — 5,985 — 5,985 
			 Government Office for the North East Cleveland Police Conference to launch Honour Based Violence helpline — 6,757 — 6,757 
			 Government Office for the North East Karma Nirvana Establish and manage regional Honour Network to support forced marriage victims — 27,920 — 27,920 
			  North Tyneside CDRP( via PSV) Training from Karma Nirvana — — 3,500 3,500 
			 Government Office for the North East Northumberland CDRP(via PSV) County wide FM road show — — 2,000 2,000 
			   HBV training 1,500 — — 1,500 
			  Sunderland CDRP (via PSV) Consultation with Karma Nirvana — 4,000 — 4,000 
			  Durham CDRP (via PSV) FM training — 10,000 — 10,000 
			 Government Office for the East Safer Luton Partnership Contribution to set up of project to support victims of HBV and FM in Luton — 10,000 — 10,000 
			 Year Totals   42,600 189,053 356,100 — 
			 Total   587,753 
			 (1 )Min.£20,000 per organisation.

Sentencing: Homicide

Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has had with the Sentencing Guidelines Council on the length of sentences for murder committed by members of gangs.

Claire Ward: I have been asked to reply.
	I have had no discussions with the Sentencing Guidelines Council on the length of sentences for murder committed by gangs. I have consulted the Council on the review of the starting point for determining the minimum term for murder using a knife and I await its formal response. Guidance on setting the minimum term to be served for murder is set out in Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and the Council guideline on the overarching principle of seriousness states that offenders operating in groups or gangs should be treated as an aggravating factor for the purposes of sentencing. I note that the Crown Court recently handed down sentences with 39 and 35 minimum terms to the top members of a gang in Manchester and a 35 year minimum term for a gang member from Sheffield who ordered a murder from his prison cell.

Sexual Offences

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cautions have been issued for sexual offences in each of the last 10 years.

Alan Campbell: holding answer 12 October 2009
	Information provided by the Ministry of Justice on the number of offenders cautioned for sexual offences, England and Wales 1998 to 2007 (latest available) is shown in the following table.
	Data for 2008 will be published in November 2009.
	
		
			  Number of offenders issued with a caution for sexual offences, England and Wales 1998 to 2007( 1,2,3) 
			   Number 
			 1998 1,726 
			 1999 1,469 
			 2000 1,301 
			 2001 1,240 
			 2002 1,203 
			 2003 1,359 
			 2004 1,553 
			 2005 1,761 
			 2006 1,922 
			 2007 1,966 
			 (1) From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and warnings. These figures have been included in the totals. (2) These data are on the principal offence basis. 
			 (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: OCJR—Evidence and Analysis Unit IOS ref: 382-09

Young Offenders

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people aged  (a) under 10,  (b) 10 to 17,  (c) 18 to 20 and  (d) 21 years and over were (i) arrested, (ii) charged and (iii) convicted for (A) violent and (B) non-violent offences in each of the last five years.

Alan Johnson: Available information on numbers of persons arrested, broken down by age group is given in table A. The table covers the period from 2003-04 to 2007-08 (latest available). There is no link from these centrally reported data to any subsequent outcome. Data on arrests are published on a financial year basis.
	Additionally, information provided by the Ministry of Justice showing the number of persons proceeded against at magistrates' courts and found guilty at all courts for violent and non-violent offences, broken down by age group, in England and Wales from 2003 to 2007 (latest available) can be viewed in table B.
	The Ministry of Justice does not centrally collect charging data; proceeded against data is provided in lieu. The court proceedings database held by the Ministry of Justice does not hold information on convictions and prosecutions data for persons aged under 10 who are under the age of liability. Data on court proceedings are published on a calendar year basis.
	Data for 2008 will be available in the autumn of 2009.
	The court statistics provided by the Ministry of Justice relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offence for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
	
		
			  Table A: Number of persons arrested for recorded crime (notifiable offences) by age group and type of offence( 1)   2003-04 to 2007-08: England and Wales 
			   Number of arrests( 2) 
			  Notifiable offence group  Aged under 10  Aged 10-17  Aged 18-20  Aged 21 and over  Age unknown  All ages 
			  2003-04   
			 Violent offences 100 83,000 56,900 256,000 900 396,800 
			 Other offences 500 230,300 145,200 555,600 1,900 933,800 
			 Total 700 313,200 202,200 811,700 2,700 1,330,400 
			
			  2004-05( 3)   
			 Violent offences 200 96,700 66,800 294,000 900 458,400 
			 Other offences 500 236,100 137,000 519,500 1,900 894,900 
			 Total 800 332,800 203,700 813,400 2,800 1,353,400 
			
			  2005-06   
			 Violent offences 200 108,500 74,500 331,800 800 515,800 
			 Other offences 500 239,900 140,300 531,100 2,000 914,000 
			 Total 800 348,500 214,700 863,100 2,700 1,429,800 
			
			  2006-07   
			 Violent offences 93 115,173 81,617 362,585 1,037 560,505 
			 Other offences 353 238,197 144,293 536,643 2,165 921,651 
			 Total 446 353,370 225,910 899,228 3,202 1,482,156 
			
			  2007-08   
			 Violent offences 41 102,802 77,864 363,629 1,685 546,021 
			 Other offences 122 212,599 145,759 568,021 2,744 929,245 
			 Total 163 315,401 223,623 931,650 4,429 1,475,266 
			 (1) Violent offences includes the offence categories of: violence against the person; sexual offences; robbery offences. Other offences includes the offence categories of: burglary; theft and handling stolen goods; fraud and forgery; .criminal damage; drug offences; other offences. (2) Figures from 2003-04 to 2005-06 are rounded to the nearest 100 therefore figures for these years may not add up to the totals, subsequent years' figures are unrounded. Additionally, figures for violent and other offences may not be accurate due to the summing of rounded figures. (3) Figures updated since publication of 2004-05 bulletin.  Note:  Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when these data are used. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table B: The number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts, and found guilty at all courts for offences relating to violent, and non violent offences, in England and Wales, by age group, 2003 to 2007( 1,2,3) 
			   Proceeded against  Found guilty 
			  Age group  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			  10-17   
			 Violent offences 18,618 18,217 18,123 18,457 18,555 9,668 10,457 11,061 11,713 12,337 
			 Non violent offences 122,172 118,445 113,608 107,732 107,979 82,873 85,733 85,096 81,976 85,104 
			
			  18-20   
			 Violent offences 15,798 14,604 14,433 14,653 14,230 8,129 8,520 8,821 9,449 9,849 
			 Non violent offences 205,968 191,682 174,739 165,256 158,361 154,359 148,231 137,806 133,612 130,763 
			
			  21 and over   
			 Violent offences 68,049 60,914 57,853 53,953 50,938 31,897 32,438 32,938 33,708 33,669 
			 Non violent offences 1,556,205 1,603,373 1,502,837 1,408,127 1,371,432 1,194,295 1,252,609 1,199,530 1,143,315 1,136,243 
			
			  All ages   
			 Violent offences 102,465 93,735 90,409 87,063 83,723 49,694 51,415 52,820 54,870 55,855 
			 Non violent offences 1,884,345 1,913,500 1,791,184 1,681,115 1,637,772 1,431,527 1,486,573 1,422,432 1,358,903 1,352,110 
			 (1) Data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Data includes the following offence types: Violent offences: Violence against the person Sexual Offences Robbery Non Violent offences: Burglary Theft and handling stolen goods Fraud and forgery Criminal damage Drug offences Other indictable offences Indictable motoring offences Summary offences (excluding motoring) Summary motoring offences (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: Court proceedings data held by CJEAU—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice

Young Offenders

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what the stated aim of the Youth Crime Action Plan Initiative is; how much funding has been  (a) distributed to and  (b) spent by local authorities through the grant in each year since the grant's inception; and how much his Department expects to spend in the next two years;
	(2)  what categories of expenditure are covered by funding through the Youth Crime Action Plan Initiative grant; and what assessment has been made of the success of the funding against its objectives of  (a) preventing youth offending,  (b) reducing re- offending,  (c) building public confidence and offering better support to young victims and  (d) ensuring that those in the youth prison system are able to achieve the five Every Child Matters outcomes.

Alan Campbell: The Youth Crime Action Plan, published in July 2008, is the cross-Government strategy for dealing with the full range of issues around youth crime and justice through a triple track approach of prevention, non-negotiable support, and tough enforcement.
	The action plan is backed by £100 million of new funding, including funding for 71 local areas to implement a package of intensive measures to address youth crime. In 2008-09, the 69 areas in England received a total of £4.5 million, plus an additional £1.7 million for positive activities on Friday and Saturday nights, and the areas report that this money has been spent in its entirety. The 69 areas will receive £24.2 million in 2009-10, plus an additional £1.4 million for summer alcohol activity, and a further indicative amount of £24.2 million in 2010-11. In addition, two areas in Wales will receive a total of £350,000 in 2009-10 and can expect the same in 2010-11 to implement the elements of the package that are non-devolved.
	The action plan funding covers expenditure to support the triple track approach. For example, to provide support for families in the greatest difficulty; police and social workers taking unsupervised young people off the streets at night; and to ensure that more young offenders carry out unpaid work to repay their communities in their leisure time.
	The action plan's achievements so far are set out in Youth Crime Action Plan One Year On, published in July 2009, and build on the Government's earlier successes which have seen recently a fall in the number of children entering the criminal justice system for the first time and a fall in the rate of reoffending.

Departmental Manpower

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many staff there were in  (a) his Department's predecessor in 1997 and  (b) his Department on the latest date for which figures are available.

Michael Wills: In 1997 the Ministry of Justice's predecessor was the Lord Chancellor's Department, which had responsibility for appointing and advising on the appointment of judges, running the court system and a certain number of tribunals and assisting in the reform of the English law. To this end it controlled the Public Trust Office, the Courts Service, the Official Solicitor's Office, the Office of the Judge Advocate General, the Legal Aid Board and several more government agencies.
	Since 1997 there has been a number of machinery of government changes, which resulted in the establishment of the Ministry of Justice in May 2007. These changes included the establishment of the Department of Constitutional Affairs from the Lord Chancellors Department in June 2003; the creation of Her Majesty's Courts Service from the Magistrates Courts Service and the Courts Service in April 2005; the setting up of the Tribunals Service from other Government Departments in April 2006; and the transfer of HM Prison Service, as part of the National Offender Management Service, with the creation of the Ministry of Justice in May 2007.
	Along with the organisational changes, the management information systems and the data they hold have been subject to significant change. As a consequence, information on numbers of staff in all the Department's predecessors for 1997 could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	However, it is possible to provide for 1 April 1997 published information on civil service staff numbers from the Cabinet Office website. The number of full-time equivalent staff recorded as working within the Lord Chancellor's Department was 10,652 and for HM Prison Service it was 37,704.
	The latest staff figures for the Ministry of Justice are published quarterly by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and they form part of their public sector employment statistics. The latest published data for the Ministry of Justice (30 June 2009) are set out in the table. The table provides full-time equivalent (FTE) figures for the Ministry of Justice (as published by the ONS).
	
		
			  Staff numbers (FTEs) as at 30 June 2009 
			   Number 
			 MOJ HQ 3,020 
			 NOMS(1) 50,660 
			 HMCS 18,940 
			 Tribunals Service 2,850 
			 Office of the Public Guardian 360 
			 Scotland Office 110 
			 Wales Office 60 
			 Total(2) 76,000 
			 (1) The figures for the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) refer to HQ and directly employed staff in public sector prisons only. They do not include the National Probation Service where the responsibility for staffing lies with the 42 areas and trusts who employ these staff. (2) The total figures do not include the Land Registry (5,860) or National Archives (630) recorded by the ONS under the category of Justice. These agencies are not reported as part of the Ministry of Justice's departmental annual report.

Fraud: Prosecutions

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prosecutions which resulted in a conviction there have been for offences related to credit card fraud in each of the last three years.

Claire Ward: There is no specific offence of credit card fraud. Prior to January 2007 persons involved in this type of activity are likely to have been prosecuted under the deception offences in the 1968 and 1978 Theft Acts relating to obtaining property by deception. From January 2007 offenders are likely to have been proceeded against under the various fraud offences contained in the Fraud Act 2006. The common law offence of conspiracy to defraud might also be relevant, depending on the circumstances of the case. Data covering offences under the relevant sections of these acts for the number of persons proceeded against at magistrates' courts and found guilty at all courts in England and Wales, for the years 2005 to 2007 (latest available) is shown in the following table.
	Data for 2008 are planned for publication at the end of January 2010.
	
		
			  Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates' courts and found guilty at all courts for selected offences relating to fraud, England and Wales, 2005 to 2007( 1,2,3,4) 
			   2005  2006  2007 
			 Proceeded against 9,955 7,983 8,200 
			 Found guilty 7,625 6,266 6,107 
			 (1) The statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe. (2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (3) Defendants may be proceeded against in one year and found guilty in the following year. (4) Includes the following statutes and corresponding offence description: Theft Act 1968 Sec 15. Obtaining property by deception. Theft Act 1978 Sec 1. Obtaining services by deception (except railway frauds). Common Law. Conspiracy to defraud. Fraud Act 2006 S.1(2aX3X4) & 2 Dishonestly makes a false representation to make a gain for himself or another or to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk. Fraud Act 2006 S.1(2bX3) Dishonestly fails to disclose information to make a gain for himself or another or to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk. Fraud Act 2006 S.6 Possession etc. of articles for use in frauds Fraud Act 2006 S.7 Make, adapt, supply or offer to supply any article knowing that it is designed or adapted for use in the course of or in connection with fraud, or intending it to be used to commit or facilitate fraud  Source:  Evidence and Analysis Unit - Office for Criminal Justice Reform

Human Trafficking

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what services will be available for trafficked women under the POPPY project in the City of Newcastle upon Tyne in  (a) 2009-10 and  (b) 2010-11.

Claire Ward: The Council of Europe Convention on Trafficking which the Government ratified in December last year commits the UK to provision of sheltered accommodation for all those trafficked women who need it.
	The Government have consequently invested £4million into specialist support services for victims of human trafficking over the next two years. This includes an investment of £3.7 million into the Poppy project to expand and improve the services that are available to victims that have been trafficked into the sex-industry and domestic servitude. The additional investment will see an expansion of supported accommodation, with refuge places for victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation and domestic servitude in London, Sheffield and Cardiff. The investment will also fund a new national co-ordinator who will help set best practice standards and work with areas to raise awareness with local agencies and funding commissioners. There will also be an increase in advocacy workers to help provide one-to-one tailored support and the community outreach team will also be extended with two link workers based within the UK Human Trafficking Centre to work in partnership with the police, UK Border Agency and other partners to help with victim identification and onward referral into support.
	Additionally, £300,000 is being invested into the UK Human Trafficking Centre to develop flexible support services for victims of labour trafficking.
	Trafficked women in the City of Newcastle upon Tyne can therefore access the full range of support provided by the Poppy project; including tailored support from the community outreach team and if needed, be relocated to supported accommodation in the identified locations, safety permitting.

Means Warrants: Greater London

Jim Dowd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his most recent assessment is of the monetary value of means warrants written off in Greater London in each of the last five years for which figures are available.

Bridget Prentice: The total values of financial penalties administratively cancelled by the HMCS London area in the last five years are shown in the table.
	
		
			   Amount administratively cancelled (£) 
			 2008-09 21,154,762.19 
			 2007-08 14,299,628.59 
			 2006-07 13,157,208.52 
			 2005-06 573,379.42 
			 2004-05 1,038,403.34 
		
	
	The amount shown equates to all administratively cancelled financial penalties not just the monetary value of means warrants which have been written off. The Department is unable to provide data solely relating to means warrants without incurring disproportionate costs.

Prisons: Manpower

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice which staff  (a) grades,  (b) rates of pay and  (c) vacancies there were in the prison service in each of the last three years; what his Department's policy on recruitment in the prison service has been in each such year; if he will consider proposals for a new prison officer grade, including rate of pay; and if he will make a statement.

Maria Eagle: The grades at which staff were employed in HM Prison Service is shown in the following table together with the maximum and minimum rate of pay for each grade or payband in each year of the last three years.
	
		
			   2006 - 07  2007 - 08  2008 - 09 
			  Grade  Min  Max  Min  Max  Min  Max 
			 Sen Man A 60,442 78,832 60,442 80,858 62,515 82,071 
			 Sen Man B 55,528 76,793 55,528 78,483 58,165 79,661 
			 Sen Man C 53,357 69,157 53,357 70,679 55,060 71,740 
			 Sen Man D 44,589 63,535 44,589 64,933 41,725 60,433 
			 Manager E 29,184 43,927 29,184 44,894 31,210 45,568 
			 Manager F 26,280 37,262 26,280 38,082 27,690 38,654 
			 Manager G 23,434 30,676 23,434 31,351 24,235 31,822 
			
			 Prison Officer 17,744 27,530 18,135 28,136 18,135 28,643 
			 Senior Officer 29,371 29,371 30,165 30,165 30,708 30,708 
			 Principal Officer 30,926 31,913 31,762 32,616 31,762 33,204 
			 Asst stores person 12,796 13,847 12,796 14,152 12,796 14,407 
			 Auxiliary 12,008 13,318 12,008 13,611 12,008 13,856 
			 Night patrol 12,726 14,084 12,726 13,611 12,008 13,856 
			 OSG 14,767 17,371 15,092 17,754 15,092 18,074 
			 Stores person 13,698 14,942 13,698 15,271 13,698 15,546 
			
			 Admin Asst 12,376 14,089 12,626 14,372 12,626 14,372 
			 Admin Offr 14,444 19,877 14,762 20,315 14,762 20,315 
			 Catering Manager 21,525 27,348 21,525 27,348 21,525 27,348 
			 Chaplain Band 1 23,082 35,799 23,082 35,799 23,082 35,799 
			 Chaplain Band 2 20,277 31,447 20,277 31,447 20,277 31,477 
			 Drugs worker 18,536 22,291 18,536 22,291 18,536 22,291 
			 Exec Officer 21,419 24,143 21,998 24,795 21,998 24,795 
			 Farm Manager 21,525 27,348 21,525 27,348 21,525 27,348 
			 Instructional Off 17,989 23,666 17,989 23,666 17,989 23,666 
			 Medical Officer 51,267 61,045 51,267 61,045 51,267 61,045 
			 Personal Sec 14,810 19,877 15,136 20,315 15,136 20,315 
			 Prof & Tech Offr 20,996 26,675 20,996 26,675 20,996 26,675 
			 Psych asst 14,444 19,290 14,444 19,290 14,444 19,290 
			 Scientific Officer 18,444 25,632 18,444 25,632 18,444 25,632 
			 Senior Med Offr 54,159 70,897 54,159 70,897 54,159 70,897 
			 Senior Pers Sec 21,419 23,430 21,998 24,063 21,998 24,063 
			 SGB1 14,089 15,412 14,372 15,723 14,372 15,723 
			 SGB2 12,563 14,089 12,816 14,372 12,816 14,372 
			 SGB2 cleaner 12,012 13,139 12,253 13,404 12,253 13,404 
			 Stores Officer C 19,680 25,000 19,680 25,000 19,680 25,000 
			 Stores Officer D 18,170 23,082 18,170 23,082 18,170 23,082 
			 Tech Grade 1 18,170 23,082 18,170 23,082 18,170 23,082 
			 Trainee Psych 17,285 19,581 17,285 19,581 17,285 19,581 
			 Typing Manager 21,419 23,430 21,998 24,063 21,998 24,063 
			 Typist 12,563 15,412 12,816 15,723 12,816 15,723 
			
			 Ind 1 pattern A 19,166 20,967 19,651 21,496 19,651 21,496 
			 Ind 1 pattern B 22,041 24,113 22,599 24,721 22,599 24,721 
			 Ind 1 pattern C 24,916 27,258 25,547 27,945 25,547 27,945 
			 Ind 2 pattern A 17,696 19,553 18,143 20,047 18,143 20,047 
			 Ind 2 pattern B 20,351 22,486 20,865 23,055 20,865 23,055 
			 Ind 2 pattern C 23,005 25,419 23,586 26,062 23,586 26,062 
			 Ind 3 pattern A 16,836 17,874 17,261 18,325 17,261 18,325 
			 Ind 3 pattern B 19,362 20,556 19,851 21,074 19,851 21,074 
			 Ind 3 pattern C 21,887 23,237 22,440 23,823 22,440 23,823 
			 Ind 4 pattern A 14,862 16,177 15,237 16,587 15,237 16,587 
			 Ind 4 pattern B 17,092 18,604 17,523 19,076 17,523 19,076 
			 Ind 4 pattern C 19,321 21,031 19,089 21,564 19,809 21,564 
			 Ind 5 pattern A 14,000 15,314 14,353 15,700 14,353 15,700 
			 Ind 5 pattern B 16,100 17,612 16,506 18,055 16,506 18,055 
			 Ind 5 pattern C 18,200 19,909 18,659 20,410 18,659 20,410 
			  Note: The figures (shown in £ sterling) do not include location, unsocial hours or other allowances, overtime or other additional payments. 
		
	
	The pay and allowances of operational grades within HM Prison Service (officers and operational managers) is subject to annual review by the Prison Service Pay Review Body (PSPRB). The pay and allowance of other grades are set through collective bargaining.
	Vacancy data was not collated centrally or subject to full data assurance until recently although the information was created in local business units. Reliable data available nationally shows that the number of vacancies across prisons and NOMS headquarters, reported on 31 March 2009, was 2,564. Providing data from earlier years could be collected only by requesting information from a large number of business units, which would entail disproportionate cost.
	Recruitment policies within the Prison Service and NOMS have undergone significant change to use information technology better and administer processes through a shared service centre. As a result most of the pre and post assessment recruitment activity takes place on line and has been centralised. Prison officers are the largest group of staff recruited, reflecting increases in prison capacity, and recruitment activity for this group of staff has been streamlined so that application and initial testing occurs on-line followed by a single day assessment event that includes work based simulations and a fitness test.
	All new prison officers appointed on or after 1 October 2009 are subject to new terms and conditions based on a 37 hour week with associated new rates of pay. There are two paybands for new Prison Officers, depending on the role undertaken. All new Prison Officers start employment in the Prison Officer 2 core officer role in the lower payband.
	The total appointment salary for new appointments in Prison Officer 2 roles is £17,1871. This is composed of £14,690 base pay plus £2,497 for unsocial hours working. This rate may be reviewed by the PSPRB as part of their annual review of Prison Service salaries. These new staff may elect to work up to four additional hours on top of the standard 37 net hours per week. These additional hours will be paid at an enhanced rate to reflect they are non-pensionable. In parts of the country, officers will receive a location allowance also.

Solicitors Regulation Authority

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many cases have been processed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority in each year since its creation; and how many such cases resulted in  (a) no further action decision and  (b) sanctions against a solicitor.

Bridget Prentice: The information I have received from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) states that over 18,000 investigations have been concluded since it's creation in January 2007. This breaks down as follows:
	
		
			  Date  Number of cases 
			 2007 (1)6,883 
			 2008 (2)7,341 
			 2009 (January to June) (3)3,838 
			 (1) A monthly average of 573.6 (2) A monthly average of 611.8 (3) A monthly average of 639.7 
		
	
	Where regulatory action is deemed appropriate, outcomes for these investigations can be categorised in one of three ways. First a sanction may be applied with no action required or secondly the case may be referred to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal or thirdly a case is closed due to ongoing action elsewhere. The SRA has provided me with a break down of sanctions against solicitors for this period. These are as follows:
	
		
			   Number regulatory action required  Percentage of cases  Sanction applied  Percentage of cases  Disciplinary referral/ongoing action  Percentage of cases 
			 2007 5,257 76 960 14 666 10 
			 2008 5,750 78 784 11 807 11 
			 2009(1) 2,956 77 408 11 474 12 
			 (1) January to June

Unpaid Fines

Michael Fallon: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much was outstanding in unpaid fines to the courts in the latest year for which figures are available; and from how many people.

Bridget Prentice: At the end of the 2008-09 financial year there was a total of £545 million outstanding in unpaid financial penalties across England and Wales. Her Majesty's Courts Service systems do not identify the number of individuals to which the outstanding balance relates. The outstanding balance has risen through the application of a strict policy that only allows fines to be written off in certain circumstances. The outstanding balance includes fines imposed a number of years ago during the period when fines could not be cancelled (2004-06) and fines which are being paid by instalments.
	The national payment rate for financial penalties at the end of the 2008-09 financial year was 85 per cent. and 71 per cent. excluding the value of administrative cancellations.
	HMCS is currently implementing the 'Criminal Compliance and Enforcement Services—A Blueprint for 2008 to 2012' which was launched in July 2008 and is currently being implemented by all of the HMCS regions. The blueprint sets out HMCS's strategic objective which is for a cheaper, faster and more proportionate system that primarily focuses on 'first time' compliance while continuing to apply the principles of rigorous enforcement to the hard core of defaulters.

Railway Stations: Ticket Offices

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport how many non-Transport for London railway station ticket offices in each London borough have  (a) been closed and  (b) had opening hours reduced in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Mole: The Department for Transport does not hold this information in the form requested. Full detail of National Rail ticket office opening hours are listed in Schedule 17 of the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement (TSA) and a copy of this document, for years 2005 to 2009, has been placed in the Library of the House.
	A number of National Rail ticket offices in London have closed permanently as part of railway infrastructure improvement schemes:
	King's Cross Thameslink station where the National Rail station closed as part of the Thameslink Programme. A new station and ticket office was opened at St. Pancras International.
	Custom House, Silvertown and North Woolwich where the National Rail stations closed to enable an extension to the Docklands Light Railway to be built.

Railways: Standards

Bob Spink: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Transport what records his Department holds on the number of rail services which departed stations prior to their scheduled departure time in the last 12 months; what proportion of these services arrived at their destination on time; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Mole: Data on trains which may have departed from stations before their scheduled time is not held by the Department for Transport, but by Network Rail. Please contact Iain Coucher, chief executive of Network Rail, at the following address for this information:
	Mr. Iain Coucher
	Chief Executive
	Network Rail
	Kings Place
	90 York Way
	London
	N1 9AG
	Of all train arrivals, 91.3 per cent. arrived at their destination within the specified punctuality margin in the 12 months up to 19 September 2009.

Private Finance Initiative

Jim Cousins: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what guidance he has given to Government departments on the fair valuation of risk and risk transfer in the evaluation of bids under the private finance initiative where  (a) RBS and  (b) Lloyds Banking Group are partners in such bids.

Ian Pearson: None, guidance on public private partnerships in general is available on the Treasury website at:
	www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/ppp_index.htm